Quotessence
Home / Quotes / Quote by Dejan Stojanovic

Quote by Dejan Stojanovic

“We must conclude that any proposition (definition) of abstract concepts (linguistically or philosophically) is not necessarily a proposition (definition) of that to which these concepts or propositions (definitions) ought to be applied. This kind of thinking, or definitions coming from such thinking, is inherently false. On the other hand, if the supposed or proposed argument reflected reality, it would be a definition of a fact and not a proposition (“definition”) of an imagined concept. Laplace didn’t show interest in proving that this is the actual reality or even stating it, so it must be that he either imagined his argument as a hypothesis or he believed that this example argument contains enough merits of itself to justify not only the argument but also the fact or truth itself. From our point of view and the idea of the Universal Mind as having a potential for infinite variety, we can conclude that even an “intellect” of a Universal Mind cannot predict and know all the varieties of its potential and the potential of all possible universes in infinity, which saves it from its own perfection while opening the door for infinite potential of the “free will.”

Quote by Dejan Stojanovic

Work

ABSOLUTE

Browse quotes and source details for this work. more

Author

Dejan Stojanovic
Dejan Stojanovic

Dejan Stojanovic, born on March 11, 1959, is a Serbian poet known for his profound emotions and unique style in his poetry, which has won the hearts of readers worldwide. more

You May Also Like

“Energy or matter, without being powered by the Ultimate Universal Force (Universal Mind), the source of everything, would not be able to finely tune itself irrespective of the potential for combinations and irrespective of its size (even if it were millions of times larger than our Universe). If it were not for the force beyond energy and matter (the Ultimate Immaterial Source of Everything) feeding, organizing, and fine-tuning it, energy and matter would be dead, without any life or force in them.”

“There is Something, the Being, and this Being cannot be denied empirically or theoretically and cannot be challenged by skepticism. It would also be hard to deny that the Being (Universe) may be God himself (Itself), theoretically or hypothetically. If, for a moment, we forget the idea of intelligent design or the idea of a benevolent God or any God as presented by religions, and even if we forget the idea of a God who creates the world (Creator-God), we can still think of a God who recreates himself in the form of the Universe.”

“The idea of intelligent design or fine-tuning of the Universe and its high complexity must be reevaluated more in the sense of a God-Universe than in understanding its complexity and probability. First, if the Universe exists, there is proof not only of its probability but also of its existence. It does not matter how finely tuned the Universe is; what matters is—how this is possible and not if it is probable. We already know that it is probable, and that is enough. To speculate about the possibility of probability on a universal level (micro and macro, metaphysical and physical) is a waste of time in a race for the sake of the race to find a winning argument and not the winning truth.”

“What if God is here? What if God is the Universe? If we ask this question, it becomes clear that God is the subject and must be the subject of scientific inquiry equally, if not more, as of religious investigations, not to mention philosophical ones. Arguments about the existence or nonexistence of God should not be based only on assumptions and premises that God is something beyond the World, beyond the Universe. It is equally legitimate to consider the Universe, God-World, as the God himself (itself).”

“It is impossible that any (incredibly highly complex) universe would be, or can be, created by pure chance. If any chance is involved, then this is a chance of higher order and functioning under the ultimate laws of the Being. But this chance (as we understand the word chance and use it) is zero because “chance” gives a chance to the possibility (probability). The chance is the creation itself (the moment of creation) and is not random. Chance is responsible more for improbability than for securing probability because the driving force ("engine") of existence is not a chance; it is not evolution per se but the potential activated through evolution and not caused or created by evolution. Evolution manifests degrees of existing potential (Being, Absolute Mind). (This potential is the infinity of probabilities [which excludes improbability because if there were improbability, there would be no infinity].) We are all part of the paradoxical labyrinth (infinity) of the strange, mysterious being called the Absolute. Solving this biggest mystery of all helps us solve our own mystery of existence because the Absolute is one organism of which we are minuscule cells.”

“It is impossible that, by pure chance, the Universe would organize itself in any way (not to mention finely tuned) either in one Universe or a multiverse. Per a cosmological constant, as we see it, the Universe must contain the same potential everywhere, and this potential is not dependent on chance. Still, it is enriched by chance so that the infinite potential may work along with free will.”

“Some doors will not open, no matter how much you keep trying, but when you keep perfecting your gift, honing your skills, and refining your craftsmanship, you will notice better doors opening.”

“The so-called "organized complexity" should not be ascribed to God or the Universe but to the complexity of our understanding. These complexities are not complex per se but arise from our limited powers of comprehension and understanding. Not only is God (the Being) simple, but the Universe is also simple. Our idea of complexity and the complexity of our knowledge is not simple. Whatever we do not understand becomes complex but becomes simple once we understand it. The level of our understanding is not the measure of complexities but our abilities. Complexities are proportionate to our abilities: the bigger the abilities, the lesser the complexities.”