First to familiarize you with the idea of Schrödinger’s Cat:

This a 60-second explanation of it (

However, to summarize:
There’s a cat in a box with a poison that might be triggered at any point in time. The box is completely sealed so there is no knowledge of whether the cat is alive or dead unless the box is opened. Therefore, on the more physics-oriented front the cat is considered to be both, alive and dead, at the same time. [A common representation of the idea of wave-particle duality]

Here is where I draw a parallel between the physics idea and a more religious/philosophy based idea

1.The cat represents the higher power/creator/God

2.The box is a representation of this life which is considered impermeable from the knowledge of existence of a God

3.The process of opening the box could be seen as the process of dying to which:
(a) If there is a God and presumably an after-life, the human would undergo such an experience after death and therefore, would regain consciousness in the alternative realm and become aware of God’s existence
(b) If there is no God and presumably no after-life, whether the human regains consciousness and is aware of the non-existence of a God is debatable however, irrelevant to the parallel drawn

Now, the implication of this is that while the metaphor is inaccurate and imprecise in several aspects,  it does raise the important question of what defines how we definitively know anything. Because is the only way of knowing whether the cat is alive or dead is only by opening the box? If it were alive wouldn’t an audible sound be made? Or if it was dead, wouldn’t a stench of death emanate?

And hence, if we assume  that similarly, the only way of knowing whether there is a God or not is by dying and experiencing or not-experiencing his physical existence, then that would mean that the only method by which we know is through sense-perception. That all logic, scientific evidence that is otherwise obtained, intuition, and faith amongst other profound ways of knowing that are heavily integrated in our lives and relied upon, would be completely suspended.

Aside from whether there can be any definitive knowledge of God’s existence,

Let’s assume his existence for this next part:

Assume that there is a God who manifests all the divine characteristics including infallibility and perfection. Assume that he is considered the beginning and the source of everything. Hence, he is the source of all ideas, which encompasses both ideas and their opposites. Wouldn’t that imply that he is therefore, capable of manifesting both a characteristic and its opposite at the same time; therefore, is existent and non-existent, simultaneously?

*Understanding the idea of God: [Part 1/2]

Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterShare on Google+Pin on PinterestShare on StumbleUponShare on TumblrShare on LinkedInShare on RedditEmail this to someone