Quantum Mechanics and Omniscience

[New Kereptica]

Much like omnipotence being carefully defined as being able to do anything which can be done, omniscience can be carefully redefined as knowing everything which can be known.

Who says omnipotence is being able to do anything which can be done? Because that's wrong. Omnipotence is being able to do anything.

[Tahar Joblis]

Much like omnipotence being carefully defined as being able to do anything which can be done, omniscience can be carefully redefined as knowing everything which can be known.

Who says omnipotence is being able to do anything which can be done? Because that's wrong. Omnipotence is being able to do anything.

Theologians of the second and third millenium may disagree with you. The whole thing about creating a rock too heavy to lift is not exactly new.

[New Kereptica]

Much like omnipotence being carefully defined as being able to do anything which can be done, omniscience can be carefully redefined as knowing everything which can be known.

Who says omnipotence is being able to do anything which can be done? Because that's wrong. Omnipotence is being able to do anything.

Theologians of the second and third millenium may disagree with you. The whole thing about creating a rock too heavy to lift is not exactly new.

The fact that they disagree is entirely immaterial. If god is only able to do anything that is possible, then he is not omnipotent.

[Hydesland]

The fact that they disagree is entirely immaterial. If god is only able to do anything that is possible, then he is not omnipotent.

Not really. Omnipotent literally means to 'all powerful' or having 'every power'.

[New Kereptica]

The fact that they disagree is entirely immaterial. If god is only able to do anything that is possible, then he is not omnipotent.

Not really. Omnipotent literally means to 'all powerful' or having 'every power'.

And is thus not restricted by possibility, else it would not by 'all' power but 'all possible' power.

[Hydesland]

And is thus not restricted by possibility, else it would not by 'all' power but 'all possible' power.

'All power' (and especially every power) does not imply that all power there is to have is infinite.

[UnhealthyTruthseeker]

True omnipotence is impossible.

[Seperates]

True omnipotence is impossible.

Really? I find that hard to believe... Do you mean literally impossible or theoretically impossible?

[New Kereptica]

True omnipotence is impossible.

Really? I find that hard to believe... Do you mean literally impossible or theoretically impossible?

Literally. By definition, it is not possible (true omnipotence being all power, not just all possible).

[UnhealthyTruthseeker]

Really? I find that hard to believe... Do you mean literally impossible or theoretically impossible?

It cannot happen. Literal omnipotence would allow a being to do things which are self-refuting. Hence, true omnipotence contradicts itself. If we impose the limitation that "god can do anything so long as it isn't logically self-refuting," then omnipotence is technically possible, but then we aren't dealing with true omnipotence but a castrated cousin.

[Hydesland]

(true omnipotence being all power, not just all possible).

I'm still not getting this. I don't see how all power is implying all power there is to have includes all impossible power.

[Seperates]

True omnipotence is impossible.

Really? I find that hard to believe... Do you mean literally impossible or theoretically impossible?

Literally. By definition, it is not possible (true omnipotence being all power, not just all possible).

Well of course... However it is theortically possible to be omnipotent... reason being that because we, as humans, are imperfect then somewhere there must be a being that defines excellence and perfection. Also, an omnipotent being would be perfect in the fact that he would have alll the power that con ever be possesed and the knowlege of how to use it... However if one becomes omnipotent then one will have the wisdom to know that when you interfere with the course of time and space that cosequences are thoretically catastrophic... which why a "God" could exist and we wouldn't know about it.

[New Kereptica]

1 : the quality or state of being omnipotent
2 : an agency or force of unlimited power

Perhaps 'all' doesn't imply absolutely everything, but 'unlimited power' certainly does.

[Tahar Joblis]

The fact that they disagree is entirely immaterial. If god is only able to do anything that is possible, then he is not omnipotent.

Not quite. Those would be the experts concerned with fine definitions of omnipotence. This is not exactly a new issue.

[Tekania]

The "Create a rock too heavy for Him to lift" is an intellectually dishonest point... It is self-contradictory... It assumes that omnipotence only exists if it is less powerful than itself... And assumes a win when nothing can cannot exceed all... IOW, it's a loaded question that is posited by the earliest species of troll.

[New Kereptica]

True omnipotence is impossible.

Really? I find that hard to believe... Do you mean literally impossible or theoretically impossible?

Literally. By definition, it is not possible (true omnipotence being all power, not just all possible).

Well of course... However it is theortically possible to be omnipotent... reason being that because we, as humans, are imperfect then somewhere there must be a being that defines excellence and perfection. Also, an omnipotent being would be perfect in the fact that he would have alll the power that con ever be possesed and the knowlege of how to use it... However if one becomes omnipotent then one will have the wisdom to know that when you interfere with the course of time and space that cosequences are thoretically catastrophic... which why a "God" could exist and we wouldn't know about it.

Perfect and imperfect are entirely subjective.

[Seperates]

Really? I find that hard to believe... Do you mean literally impossible or theoretically impossible?

It cannot happen. Literal omnipotence would allow a being to do things which are self-refuting. Hence, true omnipotence contradicts itself. If we impose the limitation that "god can do anything so long as it isn't logically self-refuting," then omnipotence is technically possible, but then we aren't dealing with true omnipotence but a castrated cousin.

But if one is omnipotent and because of your omnipotent wisdom you choose not to use the powers you've where granted then true omnipotence can exist.

[Seperates]

True omnipotence is impossible.

Really? I find that hard to believe... Do you mean literally impossible or theoretically impossible?

Literally. By definition, it is not possible (true omnipotence being all power, not just all possible).

Well of course... However it is theortically possible to be omnipotent... reason being that because we, as humans, are imperfect then somewhere there must be a being that defines excellence and perfection. Also, an omnipotent being would be perfect in the fact that he would have alll the power that con ever be possesed and the knowlege of how to use it... However if one becomes omnipotent then one will have the wisdom to know that when you interfere with the course of time and space that cosequences are thoretically catastrophic... which why a "God" could exist and we wouldn't know about it.

Perfect and imperfect are entirely subjective.

If imperfect and perfect are subjective then why are we able to imagine perfection? We may never acheive it but we strive for it.

[New Kereptica]

True omnipotence is impossible.

Really? I find that hard to believe... Do you mean literally impossible or theoretically impossible?

Literally. By definition, it is not possible (true omnipotence being all power, not just all possible).

Well of course... However it is theortically possible to be omnipotent... reason being that because we, as humans, are imperfect then somewhere there must be a being that defines excellence and perfection. Also, an omnipotent being would be perfect in the fact that he would have alll the power that con ever be possesed and the knowlege of how to use it... However if one becomes omnipotent then one will have the wisdom to know that when you interfere with the course of time and space that cosequences are thoretically catastrophic... which why a "God" could exist and we wouldn't know about it.

Perfect and imperfect are entirely subjective.

If imperfect and perfect are subjective then why are we able to imagine perfection? We may never acheive it but we strive for it.

Can we imagine perfection in any concrete way?

[New Kereptica]

The fact that they disagree is entirely immaterial. If god is only able to do anything that is possible, then he is not omnipotent.

Not quite. Those would be the experts concerned with fine definitions of omnipotence. This is not exactly a new issue.

They would be because the definition of omnipotence is what allows them to claim that their god can beat up your god while still retaining some semblance of realism. That they would want to has no bearing whatsoever on the actual definition of omnipotence.

[Seperates]

True omnipotence is impossible.

Really? I find that hard to believe... Do you mean literally impossible or theoretically impossible?

Literally. By definition, it is not possible (true omnipotence being all power, not just all possible).

Well of course... However it is theortically possible to be omnipotent... reason being that because we, as humans, are imperfect then somewhere there must be a being that defines excellence and perfection. Also, an omnipotent being would be perfect in the fact that he would have alll the power that con ever be possesed and the knowlege of how to use it... However if one becomes omnipotent then one will have the wisdom to know that when you interfere with the course of time and space that cosequences are thoretically catastrophic... which why a "God" could exist and we wouldn't know about it.

Perfect and imperfect are entirely subjective.

If imperfect and perfect are subjective then why are we able to imagine perfection? We may never acheive it but we strive for it.

Can we imagine perfection in any concrete way?

The term "perfection" in itself is concrete.

[Free Soviets]

Much like omnipotence being carefully defined as being able to do anything which can be done, omniscience can be carefully redefined as knowing everything which can be known.

aww, i wanted to say this.

of course, this gives the interesting result of god getting more knowledgeable as time goes on (assuming non-determinist temporality).

[Hydesland]

They would be because the definition of omnipotence is what allows them to claim that their god can beat up your god while still retaining some semblance of realism. That they would want to has no bearing whatsoever on the actual definition of omnipotence.

You're pigeon holing a huge group of people (from extreme nihilistic atheists to biblical literalists), you don't have to be religious to be a theologian. Doubly so to be a philosopher.

[Scotus Anonymous]

Really? I find that hard to believe... Do you mean literally impossible or theoretically impossible?

It cannot happen. Literal omnipotence would allow a being to do things which are self-refuting. Hence, true omnipotence contradicts itself. If we impose the limitation that "god can do anything so long as it isn't logically self-refuting," then omnipotence is technically possible, but then we aren't dealing with true omnipotence but a castrated cousin.

God appeared to me, and was not seen. It spoke to me and said nothing.

"I walk in paradox unharmed," It said and did not say. "I am everything and nothing. I inerrantly know everything you will do, and you can do something completely different. I make the very laws of the universe, break them at will, and they are as unbroken."

And I said, "How can this be?"

And God said, "I'm a woman."

[Risottia]

In the Copenhagen version(s), god only knows the future to within a level of certainty allotted by the particular system. (That level of certainty isn't always h-bar/2. It can be larger.)

I'll play the Jesuite...
You know, Heisenberg's principle is only about measuring simultaneously two variables that are classically conjugated in mechanics (that is, their product is an action). That is, about the act of gathering knowledge, not about knowledge per se.
If we assume an omnipotent deity, of course it could have ways other than measuring to gather knowledge.

Also there's the problem that when you measure, you cause the collapse of the probability density wavefunction... so EVEN assuming that an omnipotent deity couldn't know in a deterministic way, it still could know what the outcome of the measure will be.

A fourth possibility is that there is no god.

That would be my choice... but not because of this argument.