There Must Be a Supreme Person
August 17, 2010 1:35pm CST
Friends, some philosophers argue that there cannot be a supreme person, but that argument is not at all logical. To say that there is no supreme person is another way of saying that we are all equally situated, which is clearly not the case. We can see that all over the world persons possess different quantities of this opulence: power, beauty, renunciation, knowledge, wealth, and fame. It is not that everybody possesses the same amount of this opulence. So somewhere within all of existence there must a person who possesses a greater quantity of this opulence than anyone else. That person is the Supreme Person. No l scientists, logicians, and philosophers can prove that such a person does not exist. Since each person possesses a different amount of this opulence, there has to be somewhere a Supreme Person. To know Him and love Him is the perfection of our existence. If one would like to know who He is, what He looks like, where He lives, and what He does, you have to go to the right guru, the right guide. This becomes more evident as we grow older and more mature. What is your view on this? Professor
17 Aug 10
I am sorry to say your reasoning is faulty, you confuse value of the person with value of the properties of the person. Of course different people have different properties and such properties differ in quality. Such and such person is good at this and another is good at that, nor are such excellences distributed evenly some excel at many things and some at few but the value of the person is not dependant on the value of their properties all the best urban
18 Aug 10
hello professor, i think you are looking at things from the wrong angle (no offense intended) . you seam to be basing 'supreme' on opulence and not on the things that are spiritual. most religions have a 'supreme person' of their faith. forget about wealth, fame etc. possesions were often minimal for these people but they were wealthy in spirit, faith and love. a healthy person rich in the love of family and friends who possesses optimisum is far closer to the 'supreme' ideals of todays shallow world where temporary beauty and wealth appear so important to some.
18 Aug 10
From philosophy perspective,it is for sure there is no an supreme person who posess all of the human virtue together.what I am understaning your post is assuming this guy have all the advantage,if so,I agree with the philosopher's view since if this guy truely exist,it must being known by others someday cause he is a perfection man and he may change the world in one way or another.what do you think
• Garden Grove, California
18 Aug 10
hi professor I think a lot of us just know instinctively that there is a supreme being as that spark of God lives in all of usk no matter what we different people call Him, he is the supreme being from whom all have come. I believe in a greater power, He keeps the world going and we owe Him much and we should all worship him in which ever way our cultures say too. great discussion and you are bound to get responses too.
18 Aug 10
Hi, Professor! You are really eloquent! What you said is really reasonable and strike home. I absolutely agree with you. Yes, everyone has different amount of these opulence, including innateness and post-natal. Not everyone has Einstein's intelligence or Bill Gates' wealth. Postnatal struggle can make your life better, but it can't ensure you become the top persons in the world. Now our education has been serious distorted. it seems to say if only you had struggled enough, everyone could be the top of the world. But the question is: Who is the bottom? You can struggle for the best of yourself, but never the best of the world!