Replies

I called them “higher” because you called them “higher” and I didn’t see any point in arguing with you.

Well, why not? Isn't it necessary to clarify our terms if we hope to advance our debate?

Or are you invoking Niels Bohr's remark — "And so we are suspended in language in such a way that we cannot say what is 'up' and what is 'down'?" — and just leaving it at that? (He was speaking of the quantum world, of the problem of the "observer" in that world; but we humans don't completely live in that world. The reason being: Human beings do not entirely "reduce" to that world. There is something more that human beings express in their very "beingness," so to speak....)

If so, human communication becomes impossible.

"Suspension in language" indeed seems to be where we are. For we seemingly cannot find a common ground of meaning. Or at least, not so far....

And yet what I know is that ontology — the science of being and existence — and epistemology — the science of knowledge and knowing — are intimately bound up together, resonate together, shed light on each other.

This understanding lies at the very foundation of Natural Law theory and, thus, of the natural sciences themselves. It proclaims that the universe is structured in such a way as to be knowable, that is to say accessible to the human mind, given its natural structure....

And this is no "accident."

A Christian might say that this is so because both ontology and epistemology proceed from the One Source, which is God.