No.
If they can't, then that leads back into the Rock question and makes them no longer omnipotent.
Also no.
Advertisement
by The Empire of Pretantia » Sun Sep 15, 2019 10:43 am
If they can't, then that leads back into the Rock question and makes them no longer omnipotent.
by United Muscovite Nations » Sun Sep 15, 2019 10:43 am
The V O I D wrote:United Muscovite Nations wrote:No, it's based on the false assumption that there is a value higher than infinite value.
Wouldn't an omnipotent being - if they were truly omnipotent - be able to create a value higher than infinity or multiple infinities? Or even infinite infinities?
If they can't, then that leads back into the Rock question and makes them no longer omnipotent. If they can, then your argument is invalid, and the Rock question is still a valid question, and regardless of if an omnipotent does create this hypothetical rock, it has then surrendered its omnipotence in the sense that it cannot lift this rock it has created. It could still erase the rock, or otherwise, take and remove the rock from existence, but it cannot physically lift the rock in a physical form.
Now, the truly important thing about this is that this means a truly omnipotent being ought to be able to surrender their omnipotence more permanently - that is, create an object that they can no longer affect in any form, physically or metaphysically or nonphysically or whatever else, by any means.
...actually, this could prove why any hypothetical omnipotent "god" or "gods" out there are now non-interventionist: they made the Universe an inviolable object immune to their own power.
by The Empire of Pretantia » Sun Sep 15, 2019 10:45 am
United Muscovite Nations wrote:The V O I D wrote:
Wouldn't an omnipotent being - if they were truly omnipotent - be able to create a value higher than infinity or multiple infinities? Or even infinite infinities?
If they can't, then that leads back into the Rock question and makes them no longer omnipotent. If they can, then your argument is invalid, and the Rock question is still a valid question, and regardless of if an omnipotent does create this hypothetical rock, it has then surrendered its omnipotence in the sense that it cannot lift this rock it has created. It could still erase the rock, or otherwise, take and remove the rock from existence, but it cannot physically lift the rock in a physical form.
Now, the truly important thing about this is that this means a truly omnipotent being ought to be able to surrender their omnipotence more permanently - that is, create an object that they can no longer affect in any form, physically or metaphysically or nonphysically or whatever else, by any means.
...actually, this could prove why any hypothetical omnipotent "god" or "gods" out there are now non-interventionist: they made the Universe an inviolable object immune to their own power.
No, they wouldn't because it's logically impossible, and even omnipotent beings are bound by logical possibility. The question doesn't even make sense unless you redefine Infinity. Think about the phrase "value higher than infinity" for a little bit and you'll realize just how stupid the phrase even is.
by Dooom35796821595 » Sun Sep 15, 2019 10:45 am
The V O I D wrote:United Muscovite Nations wrote:No, it's based on the false assumption that there is a value higher than infinite value.
Wouldn't an omnipotent being - if they were truly omnipotent - be able to create a value higher than infinity or multiple infinities? Or even infinite infinities?
If they can't, then that leads back into the Rock question and makes them no longer omnipotent. If they can, then your argument is invalid, and the Rock question is still a valid question, and regardless of if an omnipotent does create this hypothetical rock, it has then surrendered its omnipotence in the sense that it cannot lift this rock it has created. It could still erase the rock, or otherwise, take and remove the rock from existence, but it cannot physically lift the rock in a physical form.
Now, the truly important thing about this is that this means a truly omnipotent being ought to be able to surrender their omnipotence more permanently - that is, create an object that they can no longer affect in any form, physically or metaphysically or nonphysically or whatever else, by any means.
...actually, this could prove why any hypothetical omnipotent "god" or "gods" out there are now non-interventionist: they made the Universe an inviolable object immune to their own power.
by Galloism » Sun Sep 15, 2019 10:45 am
The V O I D wrote:United Muscovite Nations wrote:No, it's based on the false assumption that there is a value higher than infinite value.
Wouldn't an omnipotent being - if they were truly omnipotent - be able to create a value higher than infinity or multiple infinities? Or even infinite infinities?
If they can't, then that leads back into the Rock question and makes them no longer omnipotent. If they can, then your argument is invalid, and the Rock question is still a valid question, and regardless of if an omnipotent does create this hypothetical rock, it has then surrendered its omnipotence in the sense that it cannot lift this rock it has created. It could still erase the rock, or otherwise, take and remove the rock from existence, but it cannot physically lift the rock in a physical form.
Now, the truly important thing about this is that this means a truly omnipotent being ought to be able to surrender their omnipotence more permanently - that is, create an object that they can no longer affect in any form, physically or metaphysically or nonphysically or whatever else, by any means.
...actually, this could prove why any hypothetical omnipotent "god" or "gods" out there are now non-interventionist: they made the Universe an inviolable object immune to their own power.
by The V O I D » Sun Sep 15, 2019 10:46 am
United Muscovite Nations wrote:The V O I D wrote:
Wouldn't an omnipotent being - if they were truly omnipotent - be able to create a value higher than infinity or multiple infinities? Or even infinite infinities?
If they can't, then that leads back into the Rock question and makes them no longer omnipotent. If they can, then your argument is invalid, and the Rock question is still a valid question, and regardless of if an omnipotent does create this hypothetical rock, it has then surrendered its omnipotence in the sense that it cannot lift this rock it has created. It could still erase the rock, or otherwise, take and remove the rock from existence, but it cannot physically lift the rock in a physical form.
Now, the truly important thing about this is that this means a truly omnipotent being ought to be able to surrender their omnipotence more permanently - that is, create an object that they can no longer affect in any form, physically or metaphysically or nonphysically or whatever else, by any means.
...actually, this could prove why any hypothetical omnipotent "god" or "gods" out there are now non-interventionist: they made the Universe an inviolable object immune to their own power.
No, they wouldn't because it's logically impossible, and even omnipotent beings are bound by logical possibility. The question doesn't even make sense unless you redefine Infinity. Think about the phrase "value higher than infinity" for a little bit and you'll realize just how stupid the phrase even is.
by The Empire of Pretantia » Sun Sep 15, 2019 10:47 am
Galloism wrote:The V O I D wrote:
Wouldn't an omnipotent being - if they were truly omnipotent - be able to create a value higher than infinity or multiple infinities? Or even infinite infinities?
If they can't, then that leads back into the Rock question and makes them no longer omnipotent. If they can, then your argument is invalid, and the Rock question is still a valid question, and regardless of if an omnipotent does create this hypothetical rock, it has then surrendered its omnipotence in the sense that it cannot lift this rock it has created. It could still erase the rock, or otherwise, take and remove the rock from existence, but it cannot physically lift the rock in a physical form.
Now, the truly important thing about this is that this means a truly omnipotent being ought to be able to surrender their omnipotence more permanently - that is, create an object that they can no longer affect in any form, physically or metaphysically or nonphysically or whatever else, by any means.
...actually, this could prove why any hypothetical omnipotent "god" or "gods" out there are now non-interventionist: they made the Universe an inviolable object immune to their own power.
I mean, infinity is a logical concept. An omnipotent being could create a concept higher than infinity, and will everyone to start using it.
But then infinity is no longer infinity, just a really big number. Currently, infinity plus infinity is not 2infinity. It’s just infinity, because infinity is the worst. If you made infinity infinities the concept (thanks for breaking English), then the omnipotent being still has infinity infinities power, and can still bench press your rock.
Also, I don’t know why this conceptual process “proves” that the God or gods are now non interventionist. That’s a giant logical leap.
by Kowani » Sun Sep 15, 2019 10:47 am
Galloism wrote:The V O I D wrote:
Wouldn't an omnipotent being - if they were truly omnipotent - be able to create a value higher than infinity or multiple infinities? Or even infinite infinities?
If they can't, then that leads back into the Rock question and makes them no longer omnipotent. If they can, then your argument is invalid, and the Rock question is still a valid question, and regardless of if an omnipotent does create this hypothetical rock, it has then surrendered its omnipotence in the sense that it cannot lift this rock it has created. It could still erase the rock, or otherwise, take and remove the rock from existence, but it cannot physically lift the rock in a physical form.
Now, the truly important thing about this is that this means a truly omnipotent being ought to be able to surrender their omnipotence more permanently - that is, create an object that they can no longer affect in any form, physically or metaphysically or nonphysically or whatever else, by any means.
...actually, this could prove why any hypothetical omnipotent "god" or "gods" out there are now non-interventionist: they made the Universe an inviolable object immune to their own power.
I mean, infinity is a logical concept. An omnipotent being could create a concept higher than infinity, and will everyone to start using it.
But then infinity is no longer infinity, just a really big number. Currently, infinity plus infinity is not 2infinity. It’s just infinity, because infinity is the worst. If you made infinity infinities the concept (thanks for breaking English), then the omnipotent being still has infinity infinities power, and can still bench press your rock.
Also, I don’t know why this conceptual process “proves” that the God or gods are now non interventionist. That’s a giant logical leap.
by Galloism » Sun Sep 15, 2019 10:48 am
The Empire of Pretantia wrote:Galloism wrote:I mean, infinity is a logical concept. An omnipotent being could create a concept higher than infinity, and will everyone to start using it.
But then infinity is no longer infinity, just a really big number. Currently, infinity plus infinity is not 2infinity. It’s just infinity, because infinity is the worst. If you made infinity infinities the concept (thanks for breaking English), then the omnipotent being still has infinity infinities power, and can still bench press your rock.
Also, I don’t know why this conceptual process “proves” that the God or gods are now non interventionist. That’s a giant logical leap.
Bench press? You mean kick across the universe?
by The Empire of Pretantia » Sun Sep 15, 2019 10:48 am
The V O I D wrote:United Muscovite Nations wrote:No, they wouldn't because it's logically impossible, and even omnipotent beings are bound by logical possibility. The question doesn't even make sense unless you redefine Infinity. Think about the phrase "value higher than infinity" for a little bit and you'll realize just how stupid the phrase even is.
An omnipotent being is bound by logic and reason? Since fucking when?
by United Muscovite Nations » Sun Sep 15, 2019 10:48 am
The V O I D wrote:United Muscovite Nations wrote:No, they wouldn't because it's logically impossible, and even omnipotent beings are bound by logical possibility. The question doesn't even make sense unless you redefine Infinity. Think about the phrase "value higher than infinity" for a little bit and you'll realize just how stupid the phrase even is.
An omnipotent being is bound by logic and reason? Since fucking when?
That doesn't make any sense, either. Literally all of the monotheistic and polytheistic religions out there say their god(s), when omnipotent, can do anything. In fact, I'm pretty sure I've heard multiple arguments about how god(s), especially the Abrahamic God, isn't bound by logic or reason in the human sense so which the fuck is it.
by Salandriagado » Sun Sep 15, 2019 10:49 am
by Cekoviu » Sun Sep 15, 2019 10:49 am
Salandriagado wrote:As with any other paradox, the solution is "the premise is wrong": in this case, the solution is that no omnipotent being can exist.
by The Empire of Pretantia » Sun Sep 15, 2019 10:50 am
by The Empire of Pretantia » Sun Sep 15, 2019 10:50 am
Salandriagado wrote:As with any other paradox, the solution is "the premise is wrong": in this case, the solution is that no omnipotent being can exist.
by The V O I D » Sun Sep 15, 2019 10:51 am
United Muscovite Nations wrote:The V O I D wrote:
An omnipotent being is bound by logic and reason? Since fucking when?
That doesn't make any sense, either. Literally all of the monotheistic and polytheistic religions out there say their god(s), when omnipotent, can do anything. In fact, I'm pretty sure I've heard multiple arguments about how god(s), especially the Abrahamic God, isn't bound by logic or reason in the human sense so which the fuck is it.
Doing anything =/= Doing things that aren't things
by Kowani » Sun Sep 15, 2019 10:52 am
by United Muscovite Nations » Sun Sep 15, 2019 10:52 am
by United Muscovite Nations » Sun Sep 15, 2019 10:53 am
The V O I D wrote:United Muscovite Nations wrote:Doing anything =/= Doing things that aren't things
You can't see me right now, but I'm squinting and tilting my head at you.
If a being is omnipotent and can do anything, that means they aren't restricted by logic or reason in the traditional sense; they are the rules, they make the rules - and so that means they can break or ignore their own rules. Saying they are constrained by logic/reason is saying they aren't omnipotent, which is admitting that they are just absurdly powerful reality manipulators instead.
by Lord Dominator » Sun Sep 15, 2019 10:54 am
by The V O I D » Sun Sep 15, 2019 10:55 am
United Muscovite Nations wrote:The V O I D wrote:
You can't see me right now, but I'm squinting and tilting my head at you.
If a being is omnipotent and can do anything, that means they aren't restricted by logic or reason in the traditional sense; they are the rules, they make the rules - and so that means they can break or ignore their own rules. Saying they are constrained by logic/reason is saying they aren't omnipotent, which is admitting that they are just absurdly powerful reality manipulators instead.
See my above comment. Logic isn't a constraint.
by Kowani » Sun Sep 15, 2019 10:55 am
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Haganham, Kostane, Terran Capitalistic Nations, Tiami, Varsemia
Advertisement