On the one hand, I could take the empirical view and demand that you show me this God of which you speak, so I may determine whether there is reason to prefer His concept of "chair" as the ideal in opposition to, say, my own concept of "chair".
However, I've been approaching most of these semantics issues from a Zen point of view, so it would be more consistent to note that the mind of God can only be known in our perceptions, and so, while you may have placed the ideal at one further remove from the object, it all is still only a matter of what we perceive -- there still is no chair.
I'll choose both! I see your Platonistic theology with my Zen Empiricism -- chair is what we see, not what is. |
