Philosophy: The Problem of the One and the Many

[Truthstalker]

So what is the problem? Is this it?

At dinner my sweetie ate an ice cream bar. She said “these are good,” not realizing what she just started.

“How do you know,” I replied gently," that the other bars are good? You have only sampled the one. Prove to me that there is sufficient similarity between the one you tasted and the others that you can support your rash assertion. How do you know “these” are good, rather than that “this one” is good? Perhaps the others are all bad and the one you got is the only good one." I quickly added that I was glad that hers, at least, was delectable.

Needless to say at the end of the meal I was stuck with the dishes.

 

[john_doran]

So what is the problem? Is this it?

no - that looks more like the problem of induction.

the problem of the one and the many is the problem of explaining how there can be particular things that are all numerically different, but are nonetheless all the same one kind of thing.

the type/token distinction is one suggested solution; for example, there are 12 “the’s” in this post (tokens), but yet we would say that there is only one “the” in the english language (type).

 

[Ani_Ibi]

I don’t have anything to add. I am reading along in that Chesterton book on Aquinas and came to a bit on the Many and the One and remembered Truthstalker’s thread.

Here are a few references on the Many and the One that rivetted me:

[Thomas] emphasised a certain dignity in Man, which was sometimes rather swallowed up in the purely theistic generalisations about God. Nobody would say he wanted to divide Man from God; but he did want to distinguish Man from God.

In this strong sense of human dignity and liberty there is much that can be and is appreciated now as a noble humanistic liberality. But let us not forget that its upshot was that very Free Will, or moral responsibility of Man, which so many modern liberals would deny.

Upon this sublime and perilous liberty hang heaven and hell, and all the mysterious drama of the soul. It is distinction and not division; but a man can divide himself from God, which, in a certain aspect, is the greatest distinction of all.

Are things so different that they can never be classified: or so unified that they can never be distinguished?

He seems fairly certain that the difference between chalk and cheese, or pigs and pelicans, is not a mere illusion, or dazzle of our bewildered mind blinded by a single light; but is pretty much what we all feel it to be.

It may be said that this is mere common sense; the common sense that pigs are pigs; to that extent related to the earthbound Aristotelian common sense; to a human and even a heathen common sense.

But note that here again the extremes of earth and heaven meet. It is also connected with the dogmatic Christian idea of the Creation; of a Creator who created pigs, as distinct from a Cosmos that merely evolved them.

I am curious about this statement: “a man can divide himself from God, which, in a certain aspect, is the greatest distinction of all.” What is the nature of that division from God? What does it look like? Does anyone have any insights into this question?

 

[Nita]

I am curious about this statement: “a man can divide himself from God, which, in a certain aspect, is the greatest distinction of all.” What is the nature of that division from God? What does it look like? Does anyone have any insights into this question?

Man “divides himself from God” by choosing to reject Him. (Either by openly stating rejection, and/or refusing to submit and be obedient to Him in serious matters.)

What does it look like? Well, assuming you had spiritual eyes, it would look like a soul empty of the supernatural life of grace.

From the Council of Trent Catechism: " Now according to the definition of the Council of Trent, which under pain of anathema we are bound to believe, grace not only remits sin, but is also a divine quality inherent in the soul, and, as it were, a brilliant light that effaces all those stains which obscure the lustre of the soul, investing it with increased brightness and beauty."

So, I guess Ani, if you want an “as it were” picture of division from God, just picture all the brilliant light going out and only blackness remaining. Total separation from Light.

Nita

 

[Ghosty]

In “Interior Castles”, St. Theresa of Avila discusses the visions she’s had of souls in mortal sin. It’s not at all pretty; she said that if people could see what a soul in sin looks like, they wouldn’t be able to bring themselves to sin mortally.

Souls in Grace that she sees, however, are like clear crystal castles shining from within by a pure radiance, which is the Light of God who is enthroned in the very center of the castle of the soul, and makes the crystal castle into Light Itself.

I highly recommend her work!

Peace and God bless!