Quotessence
Home / Topics / Dejan Stojanovic Quotes

Dejan Stojanovic Quotes

Browse 649 quotes about Dejan Stojanovic.

Dejan Stojanovic Quotes

“Philosophy may be sometimes hard to grasp, but it is profoundly meaningful. Mudding the waters under the pretense of doing something meaningful and great is meaningless. Language is one of the best tools of expression, but also one of the best tools to deceive, manipulate, and lead others astray. It is sometimes hard to differentiate between the two and recognize the game of deceit and manipulation. It usually happens when we need to figure out our real prowess and use the language not for real communication or expression but for personal gain, academically, or in any other way that may benefit us.”

IdeasUniverseThoughtsDejan StojanovicAbsoluteUniversal MindLanguage And Philosophy
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“We may also think that, regardless of how insufficient our language or knowledge is, we can still arrive at conclusions stemming from something more profound than the knowledge or language but only expressed by language. If language (as we understand it) were an absolute instrument of thought, there would be no different languages but only one universal language of thought. Since this is not the case, we can express the same thought in different languages with different signs and sounds.”

IdeasLanguageThoughtsDejan StojanovicAbsoluteThoughts And IdeasLanguage And Philosophy
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“Let's agree that spoken language is not an absolute instrument of thought. Still, we must agree that language, as such, serves the profound purpose of communication primarily (on a fundamental level) and some other, more sublime purposes (great works of literature and philosophy, for instance). The primary purpose of language, as one of the phenomena of existence, must be analyzed as a phenomenon with its existence and essence. Only when defined with the highest degree of accuracy, can its essence be applied to existence as the totality and the world.”

IdeasLanguageThoughtsDejan StojanovicAbsoluteThoughts And IdeasLanguage And Philosophy
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“The argument from poor design in its strict and simplest sense means that the World (Universe) and everything in it is not perfect. To better understand and answer this argument, it is essential to know that the world and everything in it were neither made nor came into being to be perfect as we understand perfection. With the more “perfect” design (to use this term for the argument), conditionally speaking, evolution would either not be possible or would be limited in proportion to its potential.”

GodUniverseDevilCosmosDejan StojanovicUniversal MindPoor DesignWhy The World Is Not Perfect
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“The perfect world is contradictio in adjecto. A perfect world is not a world anymore. A perfect world is a dead world. The perfect world contradicts existence. A perfect world, as a multitude, is impossible. A plurality implies meaning and cannot and should not be perfect. Perfect can only be One, but the perfect One is equal to its opposite, which is nothingness. The world, in its plurality, equals life. “Imperfection” secures meaning and purpose in life. In a perfect world, there would be no purpose and meaning. Perfection is only the goal and not the way or mode of the Universe. By becoming perfect, the world becomes nothing since only nothing is perfect. If the Universe were perfect, it would not be the world as we see it but “God” itself. Evolution (as atheists see it) would not be possible in the perfect world because such a world would already be perfect, which would imply that the highest point of “evolution” had already been achieved. Absolute perfection negates any evolution, except if we imagine retrolution (to coin a word), moving backward.”

GodUniverseCosmosDejan StojanovicPoor DesignRetrolution
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“The idea of evolution, proving itself before our eyes at every moment, is even less compatible with the simplistic notion of design. Anything designed is static in a way. On the other hand, if design predicts evolution, then evolution must be a crucial part of the design, but what kind of evolution? If design predetermines evolution itself, then evolution must develop as planned and only in one way; otherwise, there would be no possibility for chance or free will.”

GodUniverseEvolutionCosmosDejan StojanovicAbsolutePoor Design
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“To celebrate the world would be the most honorable task. If the World is the work of God or emanation of God, this celebration would be the celebration of both the World and God at the same time. This God is not the God from religious books. No book can claim God, and no people hiding behind holy books can be God’s representatives on Earth and be its sole interpreters and definers. The church needs thorough transformation. The church's task is not to claim or steal God but to promote and celebrate life in its purest form.”

GodUniverseDevilCosmosDejan StojanovicAbsoluteUniversal Mind
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“Why creation? Why creating? Is it not better to be perfect and absolute at the pinnacle of itself? We think it is not, as we tried to prove in the preceding pages, and it is not precisely because of perfection and absoluteness. The absolute perfection of the absolute is its death penalty, as we have already stated. Absolute of itself and for itself (without plurality) is nothing.”

GodUniverseCreationCreatingCosmosDejan StojanovicUniversal Mind
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“The biggest problem is not faith itself but the appropriation of faith by any particular religion or group, claiming to have the right (implicitly) to God. It is acquired through disputable knowledge and merely through “revelations” presented as truth. If only for this implicit claim, religions must be under constant scrutiny because such claims are not only logically false but are intellectually dishonest and immoral, regardless of the original intentions of their proponents. (Nonetheless, such ideas may have served an essential purpose, ethically and inspirationally, at the time of their making and for the particular people.)”

GodUniverseCosmosDejan StojanovicAbsoluteAgnosticismAgnosticsBeleivers
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“DETERMINISM AND PROBABILITY We may understand determinism as “the thesis that there is at any instant exactly one physically possible future” (Van Inwagen, 1983, used by Dennet in his Edinburgh University lecture). But, a theory, or a thesis, must be based on our concepts, knowledge, and understanding of reality. Our very concepts, understanding, and conclusions about reality may be only partially correct or accidental since there is not enough knowledge (not to mention evidence) to support the particular theory or thesis. In light of these ideas, it would not only be more economical but also prudent and wise to consider the reality out and beyond the customary spectrum and, by doing this, to come to conclusions or theories that would more significantly, possibly more accurately, reflect not only our ideas but the reality itself as it could be, beyond established and accepted paradigms, and, ideally, reflect the reality as it is. In that way, we would provide the ground (or possible grounds, or open the possibility) for defining the actual reality in a more tangible or, ideally, more accurate and useful manner than defining ideas and concepts based on theories, which may very well be, more or less, futile attempts to define the indefinable, depending on the degree of accuracy of any single approach. Dennett uses the example of quantum physics to prove that “at any instant, there are many possible futures, and they are completely undetermined.” Once the organism of the Universe is in motion, its destiny is determined to a large extent. This destiny will be different if the same Universe starts motion (walk, experience, life) at any other “moment.” Every destiny of every new Universe or revival is different. That is the potential of the Absolute. This potential or its variations are not known even by the omnipotent intellect or God. Even an “intellect, which knew all the forces that animate Nature at any given moment,” could not know precisely how its potential “materialized” in every new birth, revival, and cycle.”

PhilosophyUniverseCosmosFree WillDejan StojanovicAbsoluteDeterminismDaniel DennetVan Inwagen
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“God and the idea of God have obsessed philosophers since the beginning of philosophy. For any serious philosophical inquiry, it is essential to establish precise prerequisites and rules if we want to get the desired results or get close to them. If the subjects or the terms we use are not precisely defined, we may shift in different directions, not knowing that the result we get is different from what we wanted, or we may move, more or less, within the realm of logical fallacies.”

IdeasGodUniverseCreationCosmosDejan StojanovicAbsoluteWhat Is God
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“Before we start pondering about God, we have to set up the philosophical, logical, and linguistic frame within which we investigate the idea of God. If we do not define our ideas about God, we can hardly accomplish what we want, regardless of our desires. Our ideas about God are not God. Our ideas about God cannot create God. Our ideas about God are just that—ideas.”

GodUniverseCreationCosmosDejan StojanovicAbsoluteUniversal Mind
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“In religions, the idea often takes the subject's place. The idea becomes the subject itself. Since this is impossible, human words are used as the words of “God,” which serves as “proof” that God said them. In this way, human words, sold as God’s words, cannot be questioned and are “proof” of God’s existence. That’s the idea that takes the place of the subject. Everything would be easier if this were the only problem relating to God and philosophical inquiries about God. The problem is much more complicated because wherever we turn, we either find logical fallacies, misusage of language, or inadequate comparisons to try to make a statement, to try to oppose and deny the other side's argument and prove the “truth,” which usually turns out only to be our “truth,” our view and not the objective truth. We can find this among believers, atheists, and agnostics when the idea avoids or bypasses the subject in a real sense.”

GodUniverseCreationCosmosDejan StojanovicAbsoluteReligions
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“Since God is not a subject of which we can have tangible evidence through direct experience, or at least, we think there is no clear and direct experience, and we are mainly dealing with our ideas about God and not God himself. Based on our thoughts, God can be many different things to different people. In Judeo-Christian, theistic tradition, God is the creator of the world from nothing—creatio ex nihilo. In this view, God is not its creation.”

GodUniverseCosmosDejan StojanovicAbsoluteReligionsCreations
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“When we ask somebody if they believe in God, we expect them to believe or not in what we think our idea of God is. But what if God is not what we think it is? Many believe that some undetectable higher Force they do not understand governs the Universe. This kind of belief is more rational because there is something they believe in, but religious books do not describe it.”

GodUniverseCreationCosmosDejan StojanovicAbsoluteReligions
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“God is not what our idea of “It” is. There is no religious book that offers a satisfying picture of God. Nevertheless, if we think of God as a force, even atheists may agree (if not now, then perhaps in the future) that there is a unifying force in everything. That force is the Absolute, whereas the Being responsible for creating motion, energy, and “material world” is the force we may call God, the Ultimate Being, Ultimate Force, or Universal Mind (Spirit). Still, the world is not only the product of its creator but is the creator itself in a different mode of existence.”

GodUniverseCreationCosmosDejan StojanovicAbsoluteReligions
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“According to Plotinus (c. 204/5—270 CE), God is Intelligence or Mind (Nous), and the world is created out of God (ex deo) and not from nothing (ex nihilo). “The power of the One is to provide a foundation (arkhe) and location (topos) for all existents. The foundation provided by the One is intelligence. The location in which the cosmos takes objective shape and determinate, physical, form is the soul.” … “The being of intelligence is thought, and the thought of intelligence is Being.” … “No idea is different from intelligence but is itself intelligence.” Plotinus accepted the Stoic’s idea of logoi spermatikoi; for him, logoi spermatikoi is a bridge between the soul and the material.”

GodUniverseCosmosDejan StojanovicAbsoluteUniversal MindLogosReligionsPlotinusDivine Mind
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“Thomas Aquinas (1225—1274) states that God is a simple being. Although God is eternal, a material world, Universe, is not eternal. For Aquinas, God’s existence is his essence, the basis of Divine simplicity. For anything else, there is a distinction between existence and essence. Aquinas defined his five arguments for the existence of God in his book Summa Theologica: 1. The First Way: Motion. (The argument from "first mover.") 2. The Second Way: Efficient Cause. (The argument from universal causation.) 3. The Third Way: Possibility and Necessity. (The argument from contingency). 4. The Fourth Way: Gradation. (The argument from degree.) 5. The Fifth Way: Design. (The argument from final cause or ends [Teleological argument].)”

GodUniverseCosmosDejan StojanovicAbsoluteReligionsThomas Aquinas
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“Spinoza’s (1632—1677) Ethics starts with a clear framework, explanation, and definition of his terms. In that way, the philosophical inquiry becomes more accessible and precise for a reader or interpreter to understand and grasp. When Spinoza, in his definitions, uses the term substance, we understand that it is God. But when the term substance reappears under point III and then again under VI, which treats God, we must question why. For Spinoza, there is substance and substance. What is the difference between the substance under III and VI? We would say that, according to Spinoza, the ultimate, infinite substance is God, and everything formed is of the same substance. If that is the case, all substance is God or Nature. If all substance is God, then the question is, why separate substance from substance? Spinoza wanted to highlight the difference between the infinite substance of the ultimate Being, God, and the substance that makes Nature in all its forms. But nature, or anything in nature, is substance “which is in itself and is conceived through itself and does not need another “thing” to form it.” Nature is just a manifestation or mode of God or Substance. Substance (substantia) is not a new term and has been used since Aristotle, if not earlier. Perhaps the substance is interchangeable with terms like arche, aether …. fifth element, proton archon (first principle), Plotinus’ Divine mind (nous), or intelligence. Here are Spinoza’s definitions: Of God DEFINITIONS I. By cause of itself I understand that whose essence involves existence, or that whose nature cannot be conceived unless existing. II. That thing is called finite in its own kind (in suo genere) which can be limited by another thing of the same nature. For example, a body is called finite because we always conceive another which is greater. So a thought is limited by another thought; but a body is not limited by a thought, nor a thought by a body. III. By substance I understand that which is in itself and is conceived through itself; in other words, that the conception of which does not need, the conception of another thing from which it must be formed. IV. By attribute I understand that which the intellect perceives of substance as constituting its essence. V. By mode I understand the modifications of substance, or that which is in another thing through which also it is conceived. VI. By God I understand Being absolutely infinite, that is to say, substance consisting of infinite attributes, each one of which expresses eternal and infinite essence.”

GodUniverseSubstanceDejan StojanovicAbsoluteSpinoza
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“We must reevaluate and enrich the idea of God to encompass all inquiries, including scientific and philosophical, to fit reality and the truth instead of serving our more or less sophisticated but still poor or poorly presented and imposed ideas. This enriched idea of God is not only the ultimate goal but an ultimate reality we shall strive to understand fully or get closer to.”

GodTruthUniverseCosmosDejan StojanovicAbsoluteEnriched Idea Of God
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“Regardless of whether the world is predetermined, there can be no Devil. The Devil is not only the antithesis of God but is also impossible. The idea of the Devil as the result of chance, free will, rebellion, or sin is also impossible. The only possibility, philosophically, is that God is the Devil. The Devil, as understood in religions, was invented to cover up all unjustifiable evils, all misunderstandings, all sufferings, and all “sins” of human beings. The Devil is a scapegoat of religions. All that is bad we can attribute to the Devil, and all that is good to God. The invention of the Devil is the biggest fraud of all.”

GodUniverseHuman BeingsDevilCosmosDejan StojanovicAbsolute
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“Why would God create the Devil in the first place? If free will is the excuse, why would the omnipotent God allow the Devil to rebel, and why “he” would not predict this rebellion? Why would God allow Eve to sin? Are animals capable of sinning? What is sinning? Is suffering possible only within the realm of human beings? Although animals do not possess or understand the morality of humans, they can suffer. Even if they cannot suffer all human suffering, they can still suffer pain. Does God predict the pain and suffering throughout the animal kingdom? If not, why not? Why would this suffering or distress of animals be less sympathetic to God than human suffering? Who determined that humans are not animals, and is this definition, or generally accepted view, only arbitrary?”

GodUniverseDevilCosmosDejan StojanovicAbsolute
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“No main monotheistic religion offers satisfying answers to many important questions. No religion is concerned with the well-being of the animal kingdom, and no religion proposes or establishes sin in the animal kingdom. Religious books strictly reserve sin for human beings. No religion offers or predicts either hell or paradise for the animal kingdom, only for human beings. No religion even tries to explain, in a reasonable manner, the absurdity of eternal punishment and its “ethics.” What horror can equal the monstrosity of eternal punishment, eternal hell? There is no bigger pain, no bigger monstrosity, no bigger immorality, and no bigger cruelty than the eternal punishment, eternal hell. And only an imperfect, mortal human deserves this eternal measure, eternal punishment. How monstrous is this?”

GodUniverseDevilCosmosDejan StojanovicAbsolute
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“Where is the logic behind the idea that something mortal, fickle, imperfect, weak, could deserve such eternal measure, eternal punishment in its absolute force, which would be too harsh even for the Devil if it existed? Only absolute crime deserves absolute punishment, and Hell, being eternal, is the absolute punishment for its inhabitants. But what possible crime deserves absolute punishment except if a man was capable of killing God, which would be the absolute crime, deserving absolute punishment and Hell? In that case, there would be no God to execute the punishment. Therefore, absolute crime is impossible. Even if God survived, this omnipotent and benevolent God would still have mercy over such a weak and wicked creature as a human being, to exercise his grace and absolute power instead of revenge and save the soul of a lost human being from eternal pain.”

GodUniverseDevilCosmosDejan StojanovicAbsolute
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“Where can we find anything so cruel invented by the Devil in any religious book that would equal the evil majesty of the last judgment, eternal hell, and eternal punishment? It is hard to imagine or invent anything more powerful, more painful, and cruel than hell. It is also hard to imagine that the evil Devil would be able and capable of creating anything as monstrous as the Hell “invented by God,” not the Devil, according to the scriptures. Where is the difference, then, between God and the Devil? And if there is any difference, by what criteria is the evil Devil more “malevolent” than the “benevolent” God, based on what we read? If we correctly read and make common sense conclusions, there is no more immense evil than the Hell invented by the benevolent God.”

GodUniverseDevilCosmosDejan StojanovicAbsolute
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“Is it possible that a benevolent God would punish eternally weak and wicked creatures as human beings are, and probably must be, based on their limited powers? We answer that it is impossible. A benevolent God would not do all this in this world or the afterlife. It is inconceivable that the omnipotent being, characterized by mercy and grace, among other things, would be so cruel. The all-powerful, benevolent, and all-knowing God would, at least to a certain extent, save human beings from their sins and his “future son” from suffering if all this was a matter of free will and the original sin. All this sinning and suffering could have been easily prevented by the omnipotent and benevolent God without the infringement on free will, without the possibility for sin and eternal hell for the millions of people in the “afterlife life.”

GodUniverseDevilCosmosDejan StojanovicAbsoluteEternal PunishmentBenevolent God
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“The main problem is not God or the Devil but a human being incapable of resolving affairs without “sinning.” The biggest source of continuous sinning and misunderstanding is not God’s word but a word uttered by a human being who sold it as God’s word. These and similar deceits throughout history are the highest forms of the enslavement of human beings, the highest forms of insincerity, and the highest forms of disrespect to a benevolent human being. Skillful and often evil human beings act (enjoy acting), using a benevolent God as the means for malevolent human causes. Even if the reasons were benevolent and often based on ethics, the ends did not justify the means. To trade the souls of millions of people in this life, not in an afterlife, to accomplish either political goals or to provide grounds for easier rule, “ethics” and “legislature” are the best examples of evil will that can be best described as inspired by the “Devil” itself.”

GodUniverseDevilCosmosDejan StojanovicAbsoluteGod S Word
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“The omnipotent God, regardless of free will, would predict the Devil himself and save not the human race but himself from this possibility, which undermines his omnipotence. No Devil can exist as a creation of God unless intended by God. If God did not intend the Devil, then it either does not exist or is God himself. Nothing in the universe, even evil, can be ascribed to anything else except God. No Devil can accept the world’s sins, which are God’s sins. No Devil can sacrifice himself for the sins of the world or human beings, which are ultimately God’s sins. If the Devil would be offered, or serve as an excuse and scapegoat, for the world’s sins or human sins, which are, ultimately, God’s, then the Devil’s sacrifice would exceed in nobleness God’s benevolence and again prove that the Devil is a higher Being who must pay a higher price than God for the existence of all.”

GodUniverseDevilCosmosDejan StojanovicAbsoluteHigher Being
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“Who is the first rebel, the first warrior, the first sinner? Who disturbed the first and universal peace of the Absolute? God himself. Who pays the price of the original sin of God himself, not Adam’s sin? The world itself. The Devil is all we don’t recognize in ourselves. God is all we don’t understand. But what we don’t understand, we ascribe to the Devil. Evil is what we don’t recognize, and what we don’t recognize, we don’t understand. If God is the Creator, his only legitimate son is the World (Christ can only be a grandson, among myriad others in the Universe). But God and the World are the same. Since God is the World, through the World, God creates and recreates himself—the God-World.”

GodUniverseDevilCosmosDejan StojanovicAbsoluteHigher Beings
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“Existence is the noblest task for the noblest being. There is no real existence without real life. Real life is impossible in absolute comfort and perfection. Absolute perfection and comfort in real life, or of real life, would undermine its value. The value of life is manifested, among other things, through the efforts of every single being in a universal scheme of things. Without effort and action, there would be no real beauty, and even if there were real beauty, this beauty would be less beautiful because we would take it for granted; it would be too easy and, therefore, less enjoyable.”

GodUniverseDevilCosmosDejan StojanovicAbsoluteUniversal MindHigher Beings
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“The highest beauty is life itself. The measure of life is not suffering but existing. The purpose of existence is life. The measure of existing is not absolute comfort but absolute strife for absolute beauty, absolute perfection. The hardship of life, even innumerable suffering, is proof of life as it is and not as it should be, according to us. We can only dream of producing a more perfect existence, a more perfect life, a more perfect eye or jaw, but we are incapable of making life. In this sense, we are incapable of judging, in absolute terms, what good or bad design is, and we are incapable of escaping a given reality, which we may improve and approve of but in no way disprove.”

GodUniverseDevilCosmosDejan StojanovicAbsoluteUniversal Mind
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“Even if we create a better human eye (biologically), a better leg, a better heart, and a better jaw, this will prove nothing except our drive to continue and improve ourselves and live within the given frame. An idea of creation in terms of fundamental creation of what we see as the Universe (or anything in it) will always be beyond human reach. Whatever we create can only be the modification or mutation of whatever exists. We can explore our potential for novelty within scientific discoveries and arts and not in the realm of primordial original creation beyond human comprehension and reach.”

GodUniverseDevilCosmosDejan StojanovicAbsoluteUniversal Mind
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“The logical question would follow: Is the purpose of reality an illusion? Or: What would it be if it were not an illusion? Before answering these questions, we would have to define reality and illusion in the best possible way. What is reality? What is illusion? Why can reality not be an illusion to be reality? Would the world be better if everything was literal in an obvious sense? We have to understand that the significant part of reality is its mystery. When reality becomes too real or evident on every level, without mystery, reality loses its purpose and becomes, perhaps, worse than an illusion in our usual sense of the word.”

UniverseExistenceCosmosDejan StojanovicAbsoluteUniversal MindNonexistence
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“We gradually arrive at the ethical question of better or worse, which must imply which reality is better or worse. Since this automatically becomes an ethical dilemma, it creates an aesthetic dilemma: Which reality is more beautiful? Or, must all reality, irrespective of all its potential and possible variations, unavoidably comply with or conform to some principle of beauty—the Law of Beauty—which must be the basis of harmony if reality inclines toward a comprehensible and intelligible form, order, and purpose.”

LifeUniverseExistenceCosmosDejan StojanovicAbsoluteNonexistence
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“Everything that exists is not aware of its existence. Still, everything that exists is a product of some kind of idea (information, thought). Thinking does not equate to the whole existence but only to the existence of the thinking beings. Nonetheless, non-thinking beings still exist. Lack of thinking does not equate to non-existence. All beings—thinking and non-thinking—exist.”

LifeUniverseExistenceCosmosDejan StojanovicAbsolute
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“The whole purpose of the Absolute is contained much more in the meaning of existence than in the existence itself, regardless of meaning. The meaning and purpose of existence is the experience of life. Therefore, we cannot apodictically state, as Schopenhauer, that the driving force of the whole Universe is the will (or energy) per any cost but rather the meaning. Not everything is aware of its existence and life, but it serves life as a whole.”

LifeGodUniverseExistenceCosmosDejan StojanovicAbsolute
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“Existence, devoid of meaning, is meaningless. Meaning is the ultimate goal of both Absolute and existence. However, meaning, although priceless, is not without a price. If the world had no “price,” it would have no meaning. We need some hardship to find meaning in anything. Even when we talk about beauty, we must “earn” it. Only nonexistence is unconditional. Life and existence are conditional and contingent.”

LifeUniverseExistenceCosmosDejan StojanovicAbsoluteUniversal MindNonexistence
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image