Antony Garrett Lisi presented on 6 November of 2007 what he calls “An Exceptionally Simple Theory of Everything” (also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/An_Exceptionally_Simple_Theory_of_Everything ) – the newest “Theory of Everything” that supposed to wrap up in one explanation all phenomena of the universe as for example “string theory” intends to do it. Such a theory sounds very attractive, but for the moment at least all of them needs further development. It seems to me that we rightfully suppose the existence of such “Theory of Everything”, and that it should exist. On the other hand I think that such theory we can capture only approximately – it is like a horizon that is always there but always outside of our reach. An explanation of a system cannot be part of that system but needs to be situated outside of it, that is an explanation of Everything needs to be external to Everything. I think that the idea itself is a proof of the self-transcendent nature of human reason. With other words the explanation needs to be of a higher “dimension” (not in the sense of adding more to the numerous dimensions of string theory, but on an other plane of existence) and even if we can approximate it only in concrete formulas, we can reach it by something that we can call “faith”. It seems to me it is a similar notion to the supra-meaning of Viktor Frankl’s logotherapy (he affirms with this the existence of the ultimate meaning of life) - so that I would call it a “supra-theory”.
If one believes in God, creator of Everything, one can say that God holds this “supra-theory” of Everything, it is in God’s thoughts and we could receive such explanation by revelation, if we are able to understand it at all – most of all if we would include in Everything also the human phenomenon, that is ourselves besides the physical world. The knowledge of Everything involves also to know ourselves and I might say to know the Theory of Everything is to know God himself.
In faith, however, we know that a Theory of Everything, this “supra-theory” exists. But, as Thomas Merton points out, “Faith is not expected to give complete satisfaction to the intellect. It leaves the intellect suspended in obscurity, without a light proper to its own mode of knowing. Yet, it does not frustrate the intellect, or deny it, or destroy it. It pacifies it with a conviction which it knows it can accept quite rationally under the guidance of love. For the act of faith is an act in which the intellect is content to know God by loving Him and accepting His statements about Himself on His own terms” (New Seeds of Contemplation, New York: New Directions Publishing, 1972 p. 127)
What do you think of it?
“This ultimate meaning necessarily exceeds and surpasses the finite intellectual capacities of man; in logotherapy, we speak in this context of supra-meaning. What is demanded of man is not, as some existential philosophers teach, to endure the meaninglessness of life; but rather to bear his incapacity to grasp its unconditional meaningfulness in rational terms. Logos is deeper than logic”. (Frankl, Man’s Search for Meaning, New York: Washington Square Press, 1968pp. 187-188.
