The finite program cannot comprehend the infinite programmer

The finite program cannot comprehend The Infinite Programmer.

The Infinite Programmer is self-created from His Own Infinity.

The Infinity of the Infinite Programmer is One.

We cannot comprehend The Infinity of the Programmer, or how He created Himself from His Infinite Oneness.

We can only comprehend His Oneness.

If we try to comprehend how He created Himself from His Infinite Oneness we will fail by merit of our own finitude.

We will transfer our finitude to Him.

We will divide His Infinity in an attempt to comprehend it.

We will create Occam’s Razor.

Occam’s Razor is a self-forming fallacy whereby the finite human mind attempts to divide Infinity to comprehend it.

We cannot comprehend The Infinity of the Programmer, or how He created himself from His Infinite Oneness.

We can only comprehend His Oneness.

The finite program cannot comprehend The Infinite Programmer.

the finite program has no choice…

no choice = no moral responsibility

-Imp

is the Infinite Programmer still bounded by 1’s and 0’s?

I would argue we have the choice to choose between good and evil, but I understand the deterministic side of things too.

Nope, and we cannot comprehend why, because this is Infinity

well, i think we can do more than that, don’t you?

i’m pretty sure i comprehend that a great deal of truth must exist between 0 and 1 - perhaps a continuum, since we speak of infinity or boundlessness

indeed, this continuum leads me to believe that ‘truth’ - whatever that might be - exists in shades between the 0 and the 1

thus all human judgments of such a binary form - true/false, right/wrong, good/evil - are only a bias, in some sense, or rather an oversimplification

matters of everyday experience can only be more or less true or false, for instance, and never simply true or false

boundless truth exists between the true and the false

but of course, then there’s just that One truth - but that is another matter

And lets just say that that programmer uses a “randomizing” function. Oh, look, now they’ll never pin down their own result. :laughing:

Most programmers don’t know what they’re doing anyway. They just know how to do it.

But back to your analogy, let’s say that that program was designed to record and analyze the programmer’s activity on the computer (which is all too possible). All the same an AI can become rather fluent in a task or subject just by analyzing scattered information on the internet.

But yes, your analogy holds firm so long as the program is “finite” in its understanding. Of course then we can just cut out the program/programmer bit altogether and say if your understanding is limited, you’re going stop at that limit. :open_mouth:

why don’t we have any choice? choice is our main component. everything else is, well, everything else i.e. other things than ‘you’ the choice maker.

there are no finite programmers! what is a finite thing? ~ define!

there is no infinite programmer! infinity is not a thing that does things it just is, and as a result of it, things occur. there cannot be an infinite ‘it’ as it is an infinite tangent of itself and a limit to the unlimited.

interesting. so, how does this happen, i must ask… how does “infinity” create something.

and more importantly, how does “His Own” arise BEFORE he has “self-created” himself…?

:unamused:

exactly, we cannot think of it in centralised terms, infinity is not an it.

see my ‘popcorn’ thread. it doesn’t create, it has expressions such as principles like balance/polarity, or infinite sets like fractals and other processes. simply by being present and as having energy [also infinite] as present, things happen, the energy moves to the shape of the expression, such as polarity of energy in atoms is what an atom is.

Sounds reasonable to me.

Since you seem to be taking yourself you as a finite program, you are talking a lot about things you can’t understand in the rest of your post.

An easy to understand example of self-contradicting thought. :slight_smile:

…because it’s finite?

Indeed, perhaps a lack of knowledge here on infinity itself here.

Supposing for a moment that time for example is infinite there would be no need for said creator to create himself, he would just be.
There is an argument that proposes the same for existence itself which would negate the need for a creator.

I think there is some truth in the OP which applies to the above supposition as well.
Its too big for us to comprehend. (At least right now)

There is lots to know that is knowable.

I think you’ve understood what I’m saying.

A finite thing is a limited thing like a potato.

Infinity exists. Just start counting…

Infinity is an attribute.

Infinity is by definition unlimited.

No contradiction, I have said I cannot comprehend the infinite programmer.

You are aking questions which cannot be answered by the finite mind. No insult intended.

There is always need of a creator.