This objection has now been answered. From our investigation thus far, it is clear that although the initial context in which the infinite emerged was embedded in a divine principle of Origin, such as water, fire or air, early medieval developments managed to reconcile the idea of infinity with the nature of God. Apparently, the most significant distinction playing an implicit or explicit role in this regard is that between the potential infinite and the actual infinite. It was noted that Kant introduced the expression ' sukzessivunendlich ' [the successive infinite].
Arithmetising mathematics on the basis of the actual infinite. At the same time, the actual infinite appeared to be closely connected to the present , and it was often associated with what is given at once as an infinite whole or totality.
The constructivist mathematician, Paul Lorenzen , raises the point that within arithmetic itself there is no motif for introducing the actual infinite. He Lorenzen , however, comprehends the modern set theoretic approach very well while explaining it strikingly as follows:.
One rather imagines the real numbers as all of them at once [ auf einmal ] really at hand, and even every real number as an infinite decimal fraction is also imagined as if the infinitely many digits exist all at once. Paul Bernays connects the idea of being given at once as a whole with the nature of spatial continuity. According to him, the continuum is a geometric idea which is expressed by analysis in an arithmetical language.
- American Son: My Story!
- Featured Products!
- The Canadian in America: Real-Life Tax and Financial Insights into Moving and Living in the U.S.?
It is also the totality character, belonging to the geometrical representation of the continuum that resists a complete arithmetisation of the continuum Bernays In opposition to the arithmetising monism in mathematics, the idea of the continuum is originally a geometric idea Bernays Lorenzen also points out that the expansion of our number concept by means of actual infinity still reminds us of the fact that the modern concept of a real number is built upon the actual infinite which reveals its descent from geometry. At this point, we may introduce alternative expressions for the potential infinite and the actual infinite , because these traditional designations lack intuitive clarity.
We substitute the potential infinite with the successive infinite and the actual infinite with the at once infinite. These two expressions also capture their connection with number and space: firstly, the most primitive and original meaning of the infinite is given in the time order of succession of the natural numbers; and secondly, the idea of an infinite multiplicity given at once as a whole or totality , imitates two crucial spatial features, namely the spatial time order of simultaneity and the spatial whole-parts relation.
Meschkowski provides us with a comprehensive understanding of the key mathematical and theological elements in Cantor's thought. He Meschkowski explains that Cantor distinguishes between the successive infinite , the at once infinite and the 'Absolute Infinite'. The expression absolute infinite differs from the successive infinite and the at once infinite, because it refers to God Meskowski It is remarkable that Hermann Weyl, the exceptional student of David Hilbert, left the school of axiomatic formalism for the intuitionism of Brouwer who rejects the actual infinite at once infinite - also designated as the 'completed infinite'.
With the actual infinite out of the way, Weyl decided to accommodate God in its place. This entails that he Weyl accepts the successive infinite and even calls mathematics the 'science of the infinite' on condition that mathematics avoid the at once infinite.
Modern Renaissance Infinity and Perspective Politics & Social Sciences hampfoncmidvihand.cf
According to Weyl , the 'completed infinite' can only be 'represented in symbols' - and God is the completed infinite. Theology and the infinity of God. The Bible does not explicitly attribute infinity to God, although the theological tradition derived God's infinity from his omnipresence and eternity alongside attributes such as immutability and timelessness Leftow ff. In line with the historical contours outlined, the idea of eternity also entered the theological domain in the form of two apparently opposing notions: eternity as an endless period of time, and eternity as timelessness.
These notions may be related to the so-called Platonic and Aristotelian traditions, but actually should be connected with the two conceptions of infinity operative in the history of mathematics and theology. When mention is made of God's infinity in a theological context, the presupposition is that infinity in its original meaning, eminently , belongs to God with the implication that the mathematical understanding of infinity is derived from the theological understanding of God's infinity.
Yet, the primitive awareness of one, another one and so on, without an end, primarily derives from the numerical aspect of reality. The meaning of space reveals our awareness of simultaneity, of what is given at once. Leibniz, for example, juxtaposes time as 'an order of successions', with space, as 'an order of coexistences' Leibniz Kant  distinguishes three modes of time: persistence, succession and simultaneity Beharrlichkeit, Folge und Zugleichsein. Bertrand Russell aptly remarks that 'progressions are the very essence of discreteness'.
Fragment ; Plato; Plotinus - En. III, 7; Kierkegaard's nunc aeternum. Wittgenstein , 6. The remarkable fact, however, is that the understanding of eternity depends upon diverse views of infinity. If one merely accepts the successive infinite, eternity will mean an endless duration of time; thus, exploring the first two modes of time distinguished by Kant duration and succession. Nevertheless, when eternity is seen as timelessness, the third mode of time, distinguished by Kant, prevails: simultaneity - naturally associated with the at once infinite.
Download Infinity And Perspective
A theo-ontological circle. By not recognising the aspects of number and space behind these two views of eternity, a neat theo-ontological circle emerges. Firstly, infinity is lifted from its cosmic 'place' - 'seated' within the aspectual meaning of number or, as it is in the case of the at once infinite, in the way in which the meaning of number is deepened by imitating the spatial meaning of simultaneity and its correlate: the spatial whole-parts relation. Secondly, this 'transposed' meaning of number is elevated to God before it is finally 'copied back' to creation. Once the assumption is made that it originally belongs to God, infinity can only be reintroduced within the domain of number by taking it over from theology.
Alternatively, a theologian should primarily give an account of the fundamental concepts and ideas employed by mathematicians and theologians. This philosophical issue pertains to the phenomenon that different scientific disciplines frequently use scientific terms in a distinct way. These terms are known as the analogical basic concepts of the disciplines. For example, no one can deny that both mathematicians and theologians use numerical terms such as the numerals one, two and three.
The underlying philosophical issue leads to the following question: Are these notions originally that is, in a structural-ontic sense numerical notions that are used analogically within a different faith context when theologians say that there is but 'one' God, or when they speak of God's 'tri-unity'? We have noted that only when this numerical intuition is deepened by our spatial awareness of at once simultaneity , we can consider any infinitely proceeding sequence as if all its elements are given simultaneously, that is, as a 'completed totality'.
Just remember the example of the real numbers given by Lorenzen. Without an insight into the meaning of number and space, it would be impossible to account for these two basic manifestations of infinity. The at once infinite imitates the wholeness of the spatial whole-parts relation - the totality character of continuity as Bernays characterised it earlier. In a different context, Russell criticises Bolzano for not distinguishing the 'many from the whole which they form'.
Is infinity brought into mathematics on a Christian theological foundation? Once the ontic status of number, space and infinity has been acknowledged, it sounds strange to hear Chase asking: 'Could infinities such as a completed totality be brought into mathematics without a Christian theological foundation?
Yet, Chase proceeds in the opposite direction: 'At the very least, some idea of God standing outside of our experience must have been necessary, since apart from God we have no experience of the infinite. Chase's closing remark is still theo-ontologically informed and it misses the decisive point. He has precluded the option of acknowledging infinity in both its forms as 'mathematical' in nature, that is, as numerical and numerically deepened analogies operative within the theological universe of discourse. By doing this, the implicit dualism presupposed in his argument could be reversed.
Instead of supposing that the notion of 'infinities such as a completed totality' originally is a theological idea that is completely foreign and external to mathematics, one would then much rather acknowledge that within the structural nature and interrelationships between number and space, we first of all encounter the basic notion of infinity - which secondarily could be reflected within the structure of the certitudinal aspect in an analogical way.
By not tracing the notion of infinity back to its original 'modal seat', it can only serve as a notion brought into mathematics 'from the outside', that is, as something 'purely' theological that can only bear upon the field of investigation of mathematics in the second place. However, by recognising the deepened numerical seat of the notion of infinity, one should rather start from the assumption that theologians could only use notions of infinity as mathematical analogies in their theological argumentation - or, as will be argued below, as modal terms employed in concept-transcending ways.
For example, Chase does not even enter into a discussion of the notion of infinity as it is traditionally employed in Christian theology, for then, at least, he might have taken note of the fact that the Bible nowhere explicitly attributes infinity to God. Theologians traditionally extrapolate God's infinity from his omnipresence and eternity. The important distinction between conceptual knowledge and concept-transcending knowledge idea-knowledge. When the biblical mode of speech explores modal aspects as points of entry, it does so in a concept-transcending way.
Of course, it does not exclude the aspects of number and space.
Gold: to infinity and beyond?
This idea of God's uniqueness stretches the meaning of the numerical term one beyond the limits of the numerical aspect. For this reason, one cannot acquire a concept of God, because concepts are constituted by universal traits capturing the universal conditions for whatever is subject to those conditions.
If it was possible to form a concept of God, there would have been an order for 'being a god' and, consequently, many instances of God - contradicting the biblical claim that there is but ONE God. Moreover, then God would have been subjected to a law order like other creatures, eliminating God's transcendence.
Likewise, we are accustomed to a spatial unity and multiplicity, for example when we understand what a triangle is all about. A triangle is normally subsumed under the concept of a polygon and is supposed to be constituted by three corners vertices and three straight line-segments as sides so that the interior of the triangle, which is that part of a plane that is enclosed by the triangle, correlates with its outside its exterior. The term triangle literally speaks of a 'three-in-one' - with a clear numerical and spatial connotation. Yet, we can stretch the use of these numerico-spatial elements beyond the boundaries of the spatial aspect of reality, namely when we deduce from Scriptures the idea of the triune God the Bible does not use this expression as such.
Therefore, when one asks if this does not project onto God categories that are modal in nature, the actual situation is turned upside down. Alternatively, one should rather consider instances of aspectual modal terms stretched beyond the limits of the aspects in which they have their original modal seat. For example, a 'stretched' employment of our kinematic intuition provides us with the idea of continued being - a concept-transcending use of the core kinematic meaning of rectilinear uniform movement. The first manifestation of such a concept-transcending use of the meaning of the kinematic aspect is given in our idea of identity.
When we stretch this idea beyond creation, we arrive at the eternity of God - compare Exodus 'I am who I am. The basic concept of infinity is given in the purely arithmetical understanding of endlessness - what Kant calls the successive infinite. We encounter the deepened idea of infinity when the numerical meaning of succession is disclosed by the spatial meaning of simultaneity at once - hence the idea of the at once infinite.
Both these notions of the infinite may point beyond creation to God. Then we may want to acknowledge both the contribution of the numerical aspect the love, power, etc. This approach avoids the dialectical opposition which is normally attached to these two options: eternity as an endless time, and eternity as timelessness. Applying the distinction between conceptual knowledge and concept-transcending knowledge eliminates this false opposition.
What is needed is an understanding of the uniqueness and mutual coherence of number and space, and the fact that the meaning of both these aspects and their interrelations could be employed also theologically regarding the infinity of God in concept-transcending ways. The author declares that he has no financial or personal relationship s which may have inappropriately influenced him in writing this article. Baer, R. Wiegerma Hrsg.
Hegel Kongresse vom Okt , J. Becker, O. Bernays, P. Cantor, G. Chase, G. Cohn, J. Cullmann, O. Descartes, R. Veitch, introduced A. Lindsay, Everyman's Library, London. He is aware that all such speculations are 38 CHAPTER 2 only thatmere conjectures that should not be taken too seriously; and many of them are indeed quite fantastic.