philosophy time!
Comments
-
The entity would be so POWERFUL, he would be able to mess with our logic.
He would be able to create the boulder that he cannot destroy, then as he is so powerful, he would destroy logic itself, and destroy the boulder.
But that's only if he's almighty, and Logic has been unbreakable so long as the universe is concerned (Yes, i am an atheist.) -
-
I read this book too, you are not thinking out of your head. Taking other's thoughts is cheap and so is your understanding of them, as you are not the one who had them. The issue here is not that there might be a God or no, you always intended to reach a point in the thread where you would say that the God that most people idolize does not exist\is not omnipotent.
Where you lacked logic was that every boulder can be broken. Every boulder can be broken, i said it. Even the unbreakable boulder is breakable. The real proof that there MIGHT not exist a God would not be if He could destroy a boulder. If a boulder was SO EFFING BIG THAT NOT EVEN GOD COULD DESTROY HIM HOLY SH\T ITS THE SIZE OF CHINA it wouldnt really matter. Everything that big (or even much smaller, a boulder is a boulder.) can be destroyed into smaller pieces. Can God destroy it with a bolt from the sky? No. Nothing is completely destroyed. We cant destroy the boulder and neither can God. Nobody (humans and God) can destroy ANYTHING, in fact.
What REALLY happens is a dispersion of the matter. God hits the boulder and the boulder loses a bit. We hit the boulder with some rocket launcher and another piece comes out, until there is nothing left. We can then destroy all the small pieces into smaller pieces and so on, there doesnt need to be a God to do that. But, as i said before, the boulder is not being destroyed at all. Or in other words, it is being destroyed as the boulder it was once. The elements that used to be the boulder keep being crushed and destroyed and losing their form until they are not visible at human eye. Can God seem them? Sure, why not. Lets give him super speacial sight. God can continue dividing the particles in two until infinity. Even if God\Humans had eyes that could see the particles they could not divide it at some point, and they would still not be destroyed.
This argument is dumb and so is everyone that try's to joke with people's faith. Everyone believes in something that makes them live their lives peacefully. Sure, maybe i dont agree with "that" religion, but i understand that there are people that rely on it to be happy. People live in fear. People live terrified, in fact. They need something to hold on and to a lot of people there really isnt anything solid and real to hold on. If they manage to keep on living with some passion because of a God then sure. Great for them. Faith is a necessary thing to make the world work.
k end of rant. -
Almighty entity does not HAVE to equal anything named God. This is exactly why I'm against the entire connection of those two terms. You can use the question in the debate about God, with God as such an entity, but the question itself does not mention God.DUKEofPORK wrote: »And the boundaries for this God are?
Unlimited?
That in itself defeats the arguement.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fwv9IAKajc4&feature=relatedGreen_Ranger wrote: »Um... you just answered your self >.> and rather perfectly if I may add (grats
)
Also, I didn't suggest he can't destroy it... I think we're on the same page but you're not understanding me >.>
The logic behind 2 omnipotent beings having the power to destroy something is a different logic than the paradox of an almighty being creating that which it cannot destroy under any circumstances. Your exapmle has no paradox, so I can't explain the flaw in the thoughts about the paradox with an example that doesn't put up a similar paradox...
About the 2nd part:Green_Ranger wrote: »If we assume that it can create an object of equal omnipotence, then theoretically he would and would not be able to destroy it... at the same time. -
What the tl;dr said.
I was going to make a point of that earlier with the "humans created that which they cannot destroy"
One of the first rules of science, is that matter cannot be created, nor destroyed. Only reshaped.
Take plastic for example, there is absolutely NO way to destroy a piece of plastic, you can melt it, but it reforms as plastic once it hardens. You can break it, but it is still plastic.
Perhaps our idea of God "creating" the universe is wrong, perhaps God took what was here, and reshaped it. -
If that's the part you aren't understanding... look at it this way:Phillybear wrote: »Almighty entity does not HAVE to equal anything named God. This is exactly why I'm against the entire connection of those two terms. You can use the question in the debate about God, with God as such an entity, but the question itself does not mention God.
The logic behind 2 omnipotent beings having the power to destroy something is a different logic than the paradox of an almighty being creating that which it cannot destroy under any circumstances. Your exapmle has no paradox, so I can't explain the flaw in the thoughts about the paradox with an example that doesn't put up a similar paradox...
About the 2nd part:
If both are identical beings and one destroys the other, then at the same time He was and was not able to destroy it.
And to explain that I'd have to quote you >.> -
Phillybear wrote: »Almighty entity does not HAVE to equal anything named God. This is exactly why I'm against the entire connection of those two terms. You can use the question in the debate about God, with God as such an entity, but the question itself does not mention God.
So we are talking about nearly God-like? Demi-Gods?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cz3vMVd-DpY
BEAR you slay me:)
And.aMoistmuffin wrote: »What the tl;dr said.
I was going to make a point of that earlier with the "humans created that which they cannot destroy"
One of the first rules of science, is that matter cannot be created, nor destroyed. Only reshaped.
Take plastic for example, there is absolutely NO way to destroy a piece of plastic, you can melt it, but it reforms as plastic once it hardens. You can break it, but it is still plastic.
Perhaps our idea of God "creating" the universe is wrong, perhaps God took what was here, and reshaped it.
There is a thought that we are created from our creator.
An Infinitesimal part of the "Spark" of creation. -
Green_Ranger wrote: »If both are identical beings and one destroys the other, then at the same time He was and was not able to destroy it.
Ah, I see how you mean. But that doesn't apply when talking about something it is not capable of destroying...you miss the able to destroy part there.DUKEofPORK wrote: »So we are talking about nearly God-like? Demi-Gods?
They are talking about God, I'm talking about an abstract, unexisting, entirely made up entity, which has nothing to do with God, Demigods, heroes, forces of nature, godlike beings or whatever.
Just an entity existing only in my mind and this thread. -
Well in that case... one of them was able to destroy and the other was not o-oPhillybear wrote: »Ah, I see how you mean. But that doesn't apply when talking about something it is not capable of destroying...you miss the able to destroy part there.
They are talking about God, I'm talking about an abstract, unexisting, entirely made up entity, which has nothing to do with God, Demigods, heroes, forces of nature, godlike beings or whatever.
Just an entity existing only in my mind and this thread.
Or am I not understanding what you mean? I'm 99.9% sure we're saying the same thing >.> -
Phillybear wrote: »Ah, I see how you mean. But that doesn't apply when talking about something it is not capable of destroying...you miss the able to destroy part there.
They are talking about God, I'm talking about an abstract, unexisting, entirely made up entity, which has nothing to do with God, Demigods, heroes, forces of nature, godlike beings or whatever.
Just an entity existing only in my mind and this thread.
Now I am in the realm of understanding. So your rules are the equation?
That makes you God in my mind.
Dam BEAR I always had high hopes for you sir:) -
If something that can do everything creates something that can't be destroyed, it's incapable of destroying that, and therefor not 'almighty'.
However the 'almighty' will only lose the status of being able to do everything, but will still be able to create something indestructable.
Anyway, i can't think of anything that is unbreakable/indistructable, so that leaves me with the story being impossible.
Post Scriptum: I hate philosophy... -
Phillybear wrote: »Ah, I see how you mean. But that doesn't apply when talking about something it is not capable of destroying...you miss the able to destroy part there.
They are talking about God, I'm talking about an abstract, unexisting, entirely made up entity, which has nothing to do with God, Demigods, heroes, forces of nature, godlike beings or whatever.
Just an entity existing only in my mind and this thread.
many people consider anything almighty godly so yeah
i kinda used it as an explanation, to bad people did not respond as neutral as i'd guess. -
-
This thread got stupid the MOMENT that you started subsituting a supposed creator of the universe for the variable of any sort of "Almighty" being.
Towards the OP:
This is a flawed question. Define the following:
Almighty - What does this mean? Does this mean that said character can do all things possible within our known constrictions? Does it mean he can do all things possible that we can concieve of? Or do you have another set of boundries?
This is very important. If Almighty is defined by "Able to do anything humans can concieve, and any that we CANNOT concieve, then the answer is obviously that said being would come up with a solution that human beign cannot concieve.
This is the flaw with having any sort of discussion regarding infinite variables.
*Now let's assume that Almighty is defined by the ability to do anything concievable by humans. It is impossible to provide an answer that fits both variables. Therefore the question is as flawed as 2 + 2 = 5.
And finally, lets assume that the definition of Almighty is the ability to do anything under the restraints of current natural law. This voids the question entirely and is therefore not relevant.
Human beings cannot properly answer this question. Am I really the only person here who's aware of my ignorance?
*This paragraph stays in effect until we are able to comprehend everything. Good luck with that.
Note: There is an answer that dodges the definitions. If a being can transform into different things with different characteristic, then we can assign with transformation the ability to create the boulder and not destroy it, and the other transformation the ability to destroy it but not create it, then all I have to do is argue that the question was not fully defined. It is still a misargue however.
P.S.: To that guy who said that humans can't climb as well as monkeys:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5D0P9aPu51A -
ok here is the deal.
there is a entity that is almighty, would this entity be able to spawn a boulder that it cant split?
discuss this stuff, i'd like to see what you guys come up withIf an entity is almighty, it would be able to make, as well as destroy anything.
Therefore, it should be able to create that boulder. But then again, it should also have the power to destroy that boulder, and thereby proving that it can not create a boulder that can't be split and is therefore not almighty.
Conclusion: There is no such thing as an almighty entity, for logic wouldn't allow for such an entity to exist.
My Suggestions: Ak-47 Custom FN Five-seveN Custom Glock-18 Adv. M110 s.a.s.s. M4A1 Masterkey MAC 10 Suppressed XM110 Spec-ops -
If an entity is almighty, it would be able to make, as well as destroy anything.
Therefore, it should be able to create that boulder. But then again, it should also have the power to destroy that boulder, and thereby proving that it can not create a boulder that can't be split and is therefore not almighty.
Conclusion: There is no such thing as an almighty entity, for logic wouldn't allow for such an entity to exist.
My Suggestions: Ak-47 Custom FN Five-seveN Custom Glock-18 Adv. M110 s.a.s.s. M4A1 Masterkey MAC 10 Suppressed XM110 Spec-ops
Yes it would, read my post. -
If an entity is almighty, it would be able to make, as well as destroy anything.
Therefore, it should be able to create that boulder. But then again, it should also have the power to destroy that boulder, and thereby proving that it can not create a boulder that can't be split and is therefore not almighty.
Conclusion: There is no such thing as an almighty entity, for logic wouldn't allow for such an entity to exist.
My Suggestions: Ak-47 Custom FN Five-seveN Custom Glock-18 Adv. M110 s.a.s.s. M4A1 Masterkey MAC 10 Suppressed XM110 Spec-ops
We return to hopes and wishes.
Your logic is flawed! -
Yes it would, read my post.Read it and laughed at it.
Almighty mean just that, almighty. A power without boundaries. Once a power has boundaries, it is not almighty, for it is limited by those boundaries.
Its not the question that is flawed, but the "almighty" concept.
Look at the question differently.
Is a limitless power able to create a power greater than itself? The answer is no, therefore that power has a limit.
My Suggestions: Ak-47 Custom FN Five-seveN Custom Glock-18 Adv. M110 s.a.s.s. M4A1 Masterkey MAC 10 Suppressed XM110 Spec-ops -
-
Read it and laughed at it.
Almighty mean just that, almighty. A power without boundaries. Once a power has boundaries, it is not almighty, for it is limited by those boundaries.
Its not the question that is flawed, but the "almighty" concept.
Look at the question differently.
Is a limitless power able to create a power greater than itself? The answer is no, therefore that power has a limit.
My Suggestions: Ak-47 Custom FN Five-seveN Custom Glock-18 Adv. M110 s.a.s.s. M4A1 Masterkey MAC 10 Suppressed XM110 Spec-ops
The answer is no as far as we know. Are you saying you know everything?
If everything is possible, then it is possible to both be able and not able to do something. If you argue that, then you are applying limitations to "everything." -
The answer is no as far as we know. Are you saying you know everything?
If everything is possible, then it is possible to both be able and not able to do something. If you argue that, then you are applying limitations to "everything."What you are suggesting is a concept that contradicts itself.
If one is already able to do EVERYTHING, then how can one create something that could do more?
That is like saying there is a number greater than infinity.
My Suggestions: Ak-47 Custom FN Five-seveN Custom Glock-18 Adv. M110 s.a.s.s. M4A1 Masterkey MAC 10 Suppressed XM110 Spec-ops -
What you are suggesting is a concept that contradicts itself.
If one is already able to do EVERYTHING, then how can it create something that could do more?
That is like saying there is a number greater than infinity.
My Suggestions: Ak-47 Custom FN Five-seveN Custom Glock-18 Adv. M110 s.a.s.s. M4A1 Masterkey MAC 10 Suppressed XM110 Spec-ops
I'm saying the possibility exists that there is a solution that exceeds our current knowledge of everything. Including infinity.
If this is true then the question is valid. If it isn't then the question isn't. That's what I've been saying.
Whether or not I can prove there is another solution beyond our understanding is irrelevant, because I'm not saying there is one. I'm only saying that that is the only option if we assume the question to be valid. -
I'm saying the possibility exists that there is a solution that exceeds our current knowledge of everything. Including infinity.
If this is true then the question is valid. If it isn't then the question isn't. That's what I've been saying.
Whether or not I can prove there is another solution beyond our understanding is irrelevant, because I'm not saying there is one. I'm only saying that that is the only option if we assume the question to be valid.God loves circular reasoning.
Nothing exceeds everything. Everything is a limitation by itself. There is nothing more than everything, just like there is no number greater than infinity. So if something can do everything, it can not create something it can't do nor can it create something that could do more. Therefore it can not do everything, for "doing everything" contradicts itself.
My Suggestions: Ak-47 Custom FN Five-seveN Custom Glock-18 Adv. M110 s.a.s.s. M4A1 Masterkey MAC 10 Suppressed XM110 Spec-ops -
God loves circular reasoning.
Nothing exceeds everything. Everything is a limitation by itself. There is nothing more than everything, just like there is no number greater than infinity. So if something can do everything, it can not create something it can't do nor can it create something that could do more. Therefore it can not do everything, for "doing everything" contradicts itself.
My Suggestions: Ak-47 Custom FN Five-seveN Custom Glock-18 Adv. M110 s.a.s.s. M4A1 Masterkey MAC 10 Suppressed XM110 Spec-ops
Prove it. In our reality you can't. Are you saying that you can prove that there is no abstract reality in which you can?
If you can't the suggestion stands. I cannot prove that there is, however I can suggest. -
Prove it. In our reality you can't. Are you saying that you can prove that there is no abstract reality in which you can?
If you can't the suggestion stands. I cannot prove that there is, however I can suggest.
Now your talking in riddles.
How can you compare our highest knowledge of All with the truth that we may be just children in this universe. Can you explain the happening of creation?
Answer is no.
So we are far from the explanation let alone the ability to understand the creation. -
DUKEofPORK wrote: »Now your talking in riddles.
How can you compare our highest knowledge of All with the truth that we may be just children in this universe. Can you explain the happening of creation?
Answer is no.
So we are far from the explanation let alone the ability to understand the creation.
Creation has nothing to do with this. And my point IS that we don't understand everything. That's the entire basis for my argument.
Categories
- All Categories
- Z8Games
- Off-Topic - Go To Game OT Forums
- 1 Z8 Forum Discussion & Suggestions
- 16 Z8Games Announcements
- Rules & Conduct
- 5.2K CrossFire
- 954 CrossFire Announcements
- 945 Previous Announcements
- 2 Previous Patch Notes
- 1.4K Community
- 122 Modes
- 602 Suggestions
- 85 Clan Discussion and Recruitment
- 274 CF Competitive Forum
- 19 CFCL
- 26 Looking for a Team?
- 705 CrossFire Support
- 52 Suggestion
- 116 Bugs
- 29 CrossFire Guides
- 166 Technical Issues
- 47 CrossFire Off Topic