The omnipotence paradox

[Anti-Flag]

True. I just wanted to hear you say it.

It seemed so obvious, I was almost worried you had some amazing correction up your sleeve.

So it is not a paradox, it is faulty logic just like the example in the OP, "Can an omnipotent being create a stone so heavy it cannot lift it?" It does not prove that omnipotence is impossible and it does not prove it is possible. Leaving us with a personal decision if we want an opinion on the topic.

Well the OP's attempt at a simplified version of the original statement is indeed faulty logic and creates no paradox.
However I would say the original concept is a contradictive paradox, the only way for it to be possible is to exist in two opposing states of being at the same time.

 

[quantum_wave]

...However I would say the original concept is a contradictive paradox, the only way for it to be possible is to exist in two opposing states of being at the same time.

True. Now do I have to look up "contradictive paradox" just to see if you came up with that term yourself or if it is in the language of the Science of Logic? .

Note: My ancient spell checker has a problem with "contradictive" but that doesn't mean anything.

 

[Anti-Flag]

True. Now do I have to look up "contradictive paradox" just to see if you came up with that term yourself or if it is in the language of the Science of Logic? .

Note: My ancient spell checker has a problem with "contradictive" but that doesn't mean anything.

Ah I take no credit for that term, I'm sure I've heard it before somewhere. Although it's pretty much a tautology.

 

[lightgigantic]

True. Now do I have to look up "contradictive paradox" just to see if you came up with that term yourself or if it is in the language of the Science of Logic? .

Note: My ancient spell checker has a problem with "contradictive" but that doesn't mean anything.

a lack of familiarity also grants a state of contradiction where there may not be one.

For instance at a certain period of time, it would have been contradictory to view something as both a particle and a wave.

 

[Doreen]

I didn't see his statement as describing god, but rather describing logic (even though this isn't what he meant). If god did exist, any apparent paradoxes in logic would have resolutions.

Though they might not be ones we could work out, now at least.

There are two different approaches I would consider with paradoxes of omnipotence. The problem I think is worth considering not because god is claimed to be omnipotent by theists but rather because if god is the creator of the universe and he could choose the universe he creates, we have no way of differentiating between an omnipotent god and a god with limitations.

So God might have them. To me it seems like a silly enterprise, both on the part of theologians and on the part of skeptics or atheists who think they are somehow proving something by pointing out what seem to be paradoxes.

• Temporal considerations: a statement about a god's capability should specifically mention when the god has this capability. God could make a rock so heavy that he could not lift it. He could then give himself the ability the lift it anyway, and remove that ability later.
• Selection effects: a statement about god's capability should specifically mention how god would create the universe to allow or disallow an action. God could make a rock so heavy that he could not lift it. He could also plan the progression of the universe such that the rock is moved. This is somewhat harder to see, but is isomorphic to convincing a person of a thing that he could not be convinced of: by planning the mental stages of a person with perfect precision, he could allow errors in cognition such that he changes his mind anyway.

• Well, as long as we are speculating for all we know God could make a stone so heavy he couldn't lift it and lift it at the same time. What seems like a paradox can turn out not to be when one has greater knowledge. Look at the double slit experiments.
  
  A little humility on both sides seems appropriate.

 

[Michael]

For some reason I've been thinking about this a lot lately, so I guess I'll make a topic.

The omnipotence paradox is frequently stated as follows.

I see this thrown around in a lot of discussions about gods and such, often with a smugness that can be quite abrasive. They usually present two options, both of which show that an omnipotent being is inherently contradictory.

1. If a god cannot, then that god is not omnipotent
2. If a god can, he cannot lift the stone and is not omnipotent

However, doesn't the question just boil down to 'Can an omnipotent being make themselves no longer omnipotent?'? By definition, something that is omnipotent can do anything, and I imagine that would involve removing its omnipotence if it so desired. So, the question can be rephrased like the following.

And the potential options are

• If it cannot, it is not omnipotent
• If it can, it is omnipotent

Am I correct here?

And, before any of you make assumptions, I am an agnostic strong atheist with no religious affiliations. I have noticed some people here like to go right to ad hominem when they think the other poster is religious, which is why I mention this. :shrug:

I just think it shows how silly the idea of omnipotent is. I mean, think about way back when people were first making up monotheistic religion, the idea probably sounded pretty good, at least in theory - for the average sheeple anyway. But, upon closer inspection it's actually like making a round square - omnipotent Gods just do not exist ANYWHERE.

When combined with a God that knows everything things get even sillier.


I wonder how many people would worship God if they were never promised an afterlife? I mean, if God still insisted on you worshiping It, BUT, that's it - how many people would still do it? I cant tell you now, not too many. And that's really what it's all about.

 

[quantum_wave]

...I wonder how many people would worship God if they were never promised an afterlife? I mean, if God still insisted on you worshiping It, BUT, that's it - how many people would still do it? I cant tell you now, not too many. And that's really what it's all about.

I don't think everyone who believes in God worships God. In a couple of threads I have mentioned that I think there is a big difference between people who are taught a religion and choose to follow it, and people who search out truth for themselves and find God as a result. If you are taught to worship God, maybe you do or maybe you don't, probably many don't. And if you find God on your own you don't naturally migrate to the worship mode as much as to the appreciation mode, and the God you find is not the God of any particular religion IMHO.

 

[Michael]

Well, as long as we are speculating for all we know God could make a stone so heavy he couldn't lift it and lift it at the same time. What seems like a paradox can turn out not to be when one has greater knowledge. Look at the double slit experiments.

A little humility on both sides seems appropriate.

Yes, however, Gods can not make round squares. And that's not just impossible here in this universe - but in all realities, round squares, like a married bachelors, can not exist.

I think this is the point of the thought experiment.


That aside, I often think the all knowing all powerful God is creepy. Imagine a thing that can not laugh at a joke because It already knows the punchline. A think that can not learn anything new as it already knows everything. Heck, even we can learn - this God, well, It can't. It's doesn't even THINK. I mean, rational thought is a process that results in an output - this God Thing, It doesn't do this. It isn't rational. it's just ALL Knowing. A single unchanging State it exists in.

And this Thing is supposed to pass judgment??? Trying to appease a whimsical illogical irrational all knowing hard-drive in the sky. That's just Creepy. Not to mention it has been known to murder humans. Just creepy.

 

[Michael]

I don't think everyone who believes in God worships God. In a couple of threads I have mentioned that I think there is a big difference between people who are taught a religion and choose to follow it, and people who search out truth for themselves and find God as a result. If you are taught to worship God, maybe you do or maybe you don't, probably many don't. And if you find God on your own you don't naturally migrate to the worship mode as much as to the appreciation mode, and the God you find is not the God of any particular religion IMHO.

Well, OK, some people also "find" Xenu though Dietetics and just Scientology - I think it may be a similar process, at least for some people.

 

[quantum_wave]

Well, OK, some people also "find" Xenu though Dietetics and just Scientology - I think it may be a similar process, at least for some people.

Lol, yeah I suppose the process is similar but who the heck is Xenu .

 

[lightgigantic]

Yes, however, Gods can not make round squares. And that's not just impossible here in this universe - but in all realities, round squares, like a married bachelors, can not exist.

I think this is the point of the thought experiment.

hence defining omnipotence as something capable of such things is not really valid

That aside, I often think the all knowing all powerful God is creepy. Imagine a thing that can not laugh at a joke because It already knows the punchline.

many people laugh at punchlines and movies that they have seen many time before. Infact there are whole genre details to comedy that haven't really radically changed for thousands of years

A think that can not learn anything new as it already knows everything.

Just because a major pleasure of ours is to (somewhat feebly) overcome ignorance, doesn't mean that the same holds for god.

Heck, even we can learn - this God, well, It can't.

on the contrary, god is credited with control over the agencies of remembrance, knowledge and forgetfulness

It's doesn't even THINK.

not sure what makes you think that.
Don't know how you conceive of desire bereft of the act of thinking.

I mean, rational thought is a process that results in an output - this God Thing, It doesn't do this. It isn't rational. it's just ALL Knowing. A single unchanging State it exists in.

Not sure why you assume god has no outputs since anything credited with potency must have some (what to speak of omnipotency)

And this Thing is supposed to pass judgment???

make up your mind.

If something passes judgment surely it must have a capacity for thought.

Trying to appease a whimsical illogical irrational all knowing hard-drive in the sky.

Or alternatively, expecting a living entity that demands independent existence from god (through the agency of illusion of course) to somehow reconcile the issue with their values is certainly a tall order.

That's just Creepy. Not to mention it has been known to murder humans. Just creepy.

Even governmental agencies have recourse for killing (even though they don't similarly have recourse to placing a living entity after they die or before they are born ... which indeed accounts for why it is generally considered immoral for us to do so)

 

[Michael]

hence defining omnipotence as something capable of such things is not really valid

So, you'd say an omnipotent God is limited by logic in what It can and can not create?

Can God be surprised?
Can an all knowing God - really forget something? How so? (this sounds silly, an all knowing forgetful God...:bugeye

If you read your own post LG I think you'll find it reaching. I mean, it seems like you are trying to redefine yourself a God. I'll take the case of thinking. Thinking is a process. The whole reason for thinking is connected to not knowing. If you know all, there's really no point to think about anything. You'd instead be remembering. But, even then, remembering states at a place where you don't have a peace of memory and then you recall it. When you live in a state of know-all, you don't do any of this. You exist as "All Knowing".

just like a great big fat stupid harddrive in the sky.


This alieness of God is creepy if you stop to think about. No love. No hate. No desire. No nothing - just "Know ALL". And this THING murders humans LG, seemingly at a whim!

 

[tfrxsis]

Yes, however, Gods can not make round squares. And that's not just impossible here in this universe - but in all realities, round squares, like a married bachelors, can not exist.

This gives me an idea for a third approach that might resolve omnipotence paradoxes: Security through obscurity. If a god's omnipotence is only strong in certain cases, it could create a universe where anyone who cares to ask cannot conceive of instances where the paradox is exposed. This would produce what appears to be omnipotence from the inside, with no way of getting outside to expose the deception.

 

[Michael]

Lol, yeah I suppose the process is similar but who the heck is Xenu .

Why just the greatest Intergalactic Warlord this side of alpha centauri!




As I understand it, Xenu (whose name may actually be Xemu) is an elected official. You see, over where Xenu lives there were too many people. So, Xenu had a fleet of DC10 airliners built and *smokes pot* tricked a bunch of Citizens of the home world into thinking they were taking a vacation. He flew them to earth, tied them up around a bunch of volcanoes and nuked earth. These spirits (Theata's as their known). Were then sucked up into a large spirit vacuum cleaner. Over time they leaked out and infected the newly evolving primates - aka Humans. So, because they were so traumatized by being nuked, as you can imagine, they carried this negativity into us. Which is why Humans are so fracked in the head.

How simple is that?

It's should be noted that overall this is the Religious belief of Scientologists.

 

[Michael]

This gives me an idea for a third approach that might resolve omnipotence paradoxes: Security through obscurity. If a god's omnipotence is only strong in certain cases, it could create a universe where anyone who cares to ask cannot conceive of instances where the paradox is exposed. This would produce what appears to be omnipotence from the inside, with no way of getting outside to expose the deception.

Hmmmm I wonder what LG thinks here... do I see a soul mate?

 

[Michael]

Oh, and Xenu followers also believe in another silly paradox about this magical Xenu - It's even funnier than the monotheists! They think Xenu is a, wait for it, Honest Politician!?!?!?

 

[lightgigantic]

So, you'd say an omnipotent God is limited by logic in what It can and can not create?

sure, since overcoming logic has nothing to do with potency.

For instance how much time, money and resources would you expect it would take to make a square circle?

Can God be surprised?
Can an all knowing God - really forget something? How so? (this sounds silly, an all knowing forgetful God...:bugeye

Can you not conceive of any recourse to pleasure that doesn't have recourse to ignorance?

If you read your own post LG I think you'll find it reaching. I mean, it seems like you are trying to redefine yourself a God.

I could give you scriptural quotes and also scriptural commentaries that say the same thing, but it may be liable to score me a banning on a forum like this

I'll take the case of thinking. Thinking is a process.

a process of what?
Do chairs think?

The whole reason for thinking is connected to not knowing. If you know all, there's really no point to think about anything.

So if you know where there is water and where there is milk, you never think about which one you might want to drink?

You'd instead be remembering.

do you understand the role memory plays in making decisions?
(and how decisions require thinking?)

But, even then, remembering states at a place where you don't have a peace of memory and then you recall it. When you live in a state of know-all, you don't do any of this. You exist as "All Knowing".

I think you made a few typo errors here.
It doesn't make sense.
Can you try explaining this point again?

just like a great big fat stupid harddrive in the sky.

Generally people don't have the experience of hard drives making decisions, anymore than they have experience of chairs doing so.

This alieness of God is creepy if you stop to think about. No love. No hate. No desire. No nothing - just "Know ALL".

Once again, its not clear how draw an ineffable parallel between omniscience and an absence of cognitive facilities.

And this THING murders humans LG, seemingly at a whim!

the laws or karma are far from whimsical

 

[Michael]

sure, since overcoming logic has nothing to do with potency.

You at least agree that Gods can not go things beyond what is logically possible. That is, much like us human's, Gods are limited and bound by what is logically possible.

Can you not conceive of any recourse to pleasure that doesn't have recourse to ignorance?

No.

a process of what?

Modeling.

Do chairs think?

No.

So if you know where there is water and where there is milk, you never think about which one you might want to drink?

God's don't "want" because, again, want requires a change of state - which God doesn't have. God's only in one state, that being "All Knowing". It must know what "want" is, but it isn't experiencing "want".

Being a harddrive sucks like that

the laws or karma are far from whimsical

Except, just like Gods, there's no good evidence for Karma either. Not that it matters, the God-drive in the sky still murders on whim.




As for remembering, try to remember something. OK, your conscious mind just recalled something that was not in your consciousness previously. This is a function of your biologically constructed brain and they way it functions. Which is quite a bit different from your God - which doesn't have a "brain" and exists in a state of ALL KNOWING. It ... and I think that is a fair enough use of the pronoun, It doesn't think, remember, reminisce, fantasize, want, wish, dream, care, love, hate ... nothing. It only "Knows All".

One big heavenly harddrive.

You on the other hand do, and that's is directly linked to having a biological brain and the way in which your brain functions. Stop anthropomorphizing your meaty chemical brain onto the God-drive thingy.

** You don't think the God drive is Biological do you??? Does it have a hypothalamus? A limbic system? How about a frontal lobe?

 

[lightgigantic]

You at least agree that Gods can not go things beyond what is logically possible. That is, much like us human's, Gods are limited and bound by what is logically possible.

sure
since potency has nothing to do with defying logic

No.

So happiness is a byproduct of ignorance?

Modeling.
No.

but chairs are also a process of modeling too ... so I guess you have to hone down your definition a bit more.

God's don't "want" because, again, want requires a change of state - which God doesn't have.

Why does want require a change of state?
Are you trying to say that desire is constitutionally incapable of being applied to anything satiable?

God's only in one state, that being "All Knowing". It must know what "want" is, but it isn't experiencing "want".

this i s getting a complex - and all knowing entity doesn't know what want is?
(sounds like a square circle)

Being a harddrive sucks like that

hence memory alone is not sufficient for decision making.

Except, just like Gods, there's no good evidence for Karma either. Not that it matters, the God-drive in the sky still murders on whim.

so you're not prepared to discuss the concepts that surround god unless they paint him as evil or something?
:shrug:

As for remembering, try to remember something. OK, your conscious mind just recalled something that was not in your consciousness previously. This is a function of your biologically constructed brain and they way it functions.

That's a load of bullshit that you just pulled out your arse.
There is no biological requiem for eulogizing memories past gone(assuming that you aren't discussing hollywood)

Which is quite a bit different from your God - which doesn't have a "brain" and exists in a state of ALL KNOWING.

hehe
if you can't entertain consciousness as something distinct from the brain you will never understand it.

It ... and I think that is a fair enough use of the pronoun, It doesn't think, remember, reminisce, fantasize, want, wish, dream, care, love, hate ... nothing. It only "Knows All".

what is the point of knowledge that never makes it do a decision?
seriously, your definition is just another attempt to picture god as some pathetic entity so you can form a stronger argument

One big heavenly harddrive.

You on the other hand do, and that's is directly linked to having a biological brain and the way in which your brain functions. Stop anthropomorphizing your meaty chemical brain onto the God-drive thingy.

But, as I said, this leads to the crossing of a very subtle line, and after running over that line during programming, the first impression many people get is that the person is inferior to the computer — that the programmer is in some way a defective imitation. And in certain ways the computer is better than human beings. This is what gives rise to the feeling, not that the computer is made in the imitation of man, but, quite the other way around, that in a certain sense man is made in the image of the computer. So we may start out by thinking that the computer is modeled after the brain or human thought, but then we turn around and say instead that the brain itself is a kind of computer. For example, yesterday someone pointed to his head and said, "the computer up here." Perhaps it was intended as an amusing gesture, but at the same time, it was an almost universally recognized comment, one which is, I think, quite serious and, under the circumstances, dangerous.

stop mechanimorphizing you consciousness

** You don't think the God drive is Biological do you???

You don't think physics drives biology, do you?

Does it have a hypothalamus? A limbic system? How about a frontal lobe?

Can consciousness be integrated into any of these things once it has left them?
I mean I can certainly integrate memory with a motherboard, so the analogy doesn't make such a smooth transition.

 

[Michael]

sure
since potency has nothing to do with defying logic

define potency and it's relationship to logic. For some reason I keep thinking of God with his almighty heavenly erection ...

(hope that wasn't too visual)

So happiness is a byproduct of ignorance?

Not a byproduct per say but yes happiness is intimately linked to not already knowing something.

but chairs are also a process of modeling too ... so I guess you have to hone down your definition a bit more.

OK, your brain processes information and creates new information in the process.

Why does want require a change of state?
Are you trying to say that desire is constitutionally incapable of being applied to anything satiable?

All emotions require a change of mental state from one to another, whatever that change is, is the emotion.

It's pretty simple. Emotions are just like any other mental construct. They created by the brain for a limited time by a change in neural activity within a particular area of the neocortex.

this i s getting a complex - and all knowing entity doesn't know what want is?(sounds like a square circle)

It knows what want is, but it doesn't experience want. It can't, because, as noted above, want is a change in information within the brain, this God-drive thing doesn't change it's information - it knows all information.

In short: There is nothing new for God-drive to know, it lacks the ability to experience a new emotion. It has existed always and with all information. I'd probably refer to thing as the impersonal Universe, or reality, and leave it at that.

hence memory alone is not sufficient for decision making.

God-drive doesn't make decisions does it? How exactly would this decision making process take place?

Again, you are anthropomorphizing the God-drive again. I notice you do this a lot. It is a thing LG. It's not human, it's not biological, it doesn't have a brain, it's doesn't think at all. It exists in a state of all knowing (or maybe we should say, having all available knowledge? - you know, like, ummmm THE UNIVERSE! )

so you're not prepared to discuss the concepts that surround god unless they paint him as evil or something?
:shrug:

That's why I called it creepy. But, then again, this is a thing that created a reality whereby living creatures must murder one another in order to survive. That's way f*cked up if you ask me. Especially given it could have just as easily made living creatures in a universe in such a way as they didn't need to eat at all and couldn't harm one another.

That's a load of bullshit that you just pulled out your arse.
There is no biological requiem for eulogizing memories past gone(assuming that you aren't discussing hollywood)

I'm not sure what you missed here. There is a biological component to all brain activity (it's biological LG) including remembering.

hehe
if you can't entertain consciousness as something distinct from the brain you will never understand it.

Ever observe a "conscious" being without a brain?

what is the point of knowledge that never makes it do a decision?
seriously, your definition is just another attempt to picture god as some pathetic entity so you can form a stronger argument

knowledge doesn't really have a point does it? Anyway, other than the universe, which we can agree does exist, nothing known contains all information available - and so it's all really just a thought experiment. Yeah, what's the point? There isn't one. Which fits well with the idea that God is an unconscious universe and this is where atheists and theists probably agree?

You don't think physics drives biology, do you?

What do you mean by drives?

Can consciousness be integrated into any of these things once it has left them?
I mean I can certainly integrate memory with a motherboard, so the analogy doesn't make such a smooth transition.

I'm not sure of your point. Information of how to build my bike is stored in the make up of the bike itself - it's not conscious.