God is an Impossibility

For intuitive and critical discussions, from spirituality to theological doctrines. Fair warning: because the subject matter is personal, moderation is strict.

Moderator: Dan~

Re: God is an Impossibility

Postby Arminius » Thu Oct 19, 2017 9:27 pm

Alf wrote:Is love possible?
Does hate contradict love?
Is hate possible?

Prismatic567 wrote:God a contradiction?
A contradiction is impossible. [if same sense, time and conditions]
Therefore God is an impossibility.

Why should God be a contradiction?
Nobody knows whether God is a contradiction.

Why should a contradiction be impossible?
Most of us know that contradictions are possible.

Prismatic567 wrote:PI. Absolute perfection is an impossibility
P2. God imperatively must be absolutely perfect
C.. Therefore God is an impossibility.

Why should an absolute perfection not be possible?
An absolute perfection is possible. As an ideal, it is possible, can become real; whether it does or not is a different question.

Your premises are not valid, thus false.

As James already said:

James S Saint wrote:
Prismatic567 wrote:Here is an argument Why God is an Impossibility.

There are two types of perfection for philosophical consideration, i.e.

    1. Relative perfection
    2. Absolute perfection

1. Relative perfection
If one's answers in an objective tests are ALL correct that is a 100% perfect score.
Perfect scores 10/10 or 7/7 used to be given to extra-ordinary performance in diving, gymnastics, skating, and the likes. So perfection from the relative perspective can happen and exist within man-made systems of empirically-based measurements.

2. Absolute perfection
Absolute perfection is an idea, ideal, and it is only a thought that can arise from reason and never the empirical at all.
Absolute perfection is an impossibility in the empirical, thus exist only theoretically.
Examples are perfect circle, square, triangle, etc.

Generally, perfection is attributed to God. Any god with less than perfect attributes would be subjected to being inferior to another's god. As such, God has to be absolutely perfect which is the ontological god, i.e. god is a Being than which no greater can be conceived.

So,
    PI. Absolute perfection is an impossibility
    P2. God imperatively must be absolutely perfect
    C.. Therefore God is an impossibility.

Can any theists counter the above?

False for a variety of reasons, but let's just pick one...

Prismatic567 wrote:Absolute perfection is an idea, ideal, and it is only a thought that can arise from reason and never the empirical at all.
Absolute perfection is an impossibility in the empirical, thus exist only theoretically.

False. A convenient presumption for your bias, but hardly provable and certainly not an acceptable premise.

One of a great, great many "perfect" empirical existences is mass attraction. Mass attraction is very easily observable existence and empirically provable. Of course there are a great many others; speed of light, linear momentum, conservation of energy, centripetal momentum, ... These are all 100% true to reality and indispensable to the construct of the universe = "perfect".
Image
User avatar
Arminius
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5732
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis

Re: God is an Impossibility

Postby Magnus Anderson » Thu Oct 19, 2017 11:14 pm

James is a moron who thinks that beliefs can transcend probability.
In other words, that beliefs can be more than merely more or less probable.
Basically, a dumb absolutist who thinks that if he's 100% certain about something that that something has no choice but to happen.
"Let's keep the debate about poor people in the US specifically. It's the land of opportunity. So everyone has an opportunity. That means everyone can get money. So some people who don't have it just aren't using thier opportunities, and then out of those who are using them, then most squander what they gain through poor choices, which keeps them poor. It's no one else's fault. The end."

Mr. Reasonable
Magnus Anderson
Philosopher
 
Posts: 4723
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2014 7:26 pm

Re: God is an Impossibility

Postby James S Saint » Fri Oct 20, 2017 4:50 am

Magnus Anderson wrote:James is a moron who thinks that beliefs can transcend probability.
In other words, that beliefs can be more than merely more or less probable.
Basically, a dumb absolutist who thinks that if he's 100% certain about something that that something has no choice but to happen.
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25976
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: God is an Impossibility

Postby Prismatic567 » Fri Oct 20, 2017 6:54 am

Magnus Anderson wrote:I am making a very subtle point that does not refute but strengthens your point.
It makes it resistant to certain kind of attacks.
The word "impossible" means "highly improbable".
In order to say that what some word refers to is impossible that word must refer to something specific -- something that can be experienced.
If it does not then it makes no sense to say it is impossible.
Perfect circles aren't impossible/improbable. They are simply without any meaning.
To say that perfect circles are improbable is to suggest that the concept of perfect circles is a meaningful one.
It is to say that perfect circles can exist although they don't.
Zombies are impossible/improbable.
The concept of zombies is a meaningful one.
Zombies can exist although they don't.
Justice for zombies.

There are people who think that impossibility and improbability are two different things.
According to these people, an event is said to be impossible if there is not a single of instance of it within the entire universe.
I am not too sure with the above.

I can agree with, the word "impossible" means "highly improbable".

Kant differentiated between 'possible' and 'impossible' to exist in the widest sense.
What is possible must have a related empirical reality.
For example, human-like aliens in a planet billion light years away are a possibility, albeit it is of low probability. Note the words in bold are empirically possible as observed.

If meaning = "the end, purpose, or significance of something:"
http://www.dictionary.com/browse/meaning
then human-liked aliens has meaning but has a low degree of meaning.

A square-circle is an impossibility because it is a contradiction and has no rational and empirical backing at all. It is also something meaningless [as defined].

God is an impossibility because its imperative necessity of absolute perfection which is an impossibility, but the "idea" [philosophical] of God do has meaning [as defined above], i.e. useful psychological meaning that drove the majority of theists to believe and cling to a god.

Human Zombies are a possibility [empirical elements] but they are of low possibility/probability and low on meaning. There are no evidence of any confirmed corpse coming back to life.

The above are my points re impossibility/improbability in relation to 'meaning' and taking into account intensity and degrees.
I am a progressive human being, a World Citizen, NOT-a-theist and not religious.
Prismatic567
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2854
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2014 4:35 am

Re: God is an Impossibility

Postby Prismatic567 » Fri Oct 20, 2017 7:26 am

Alf wrote:Many people have tried to show that "God is an impossibility". All of them have failed. That does not prove the existence of God, but it shows clearly that God is a possibility. And there is another evidence: History of mankind. It is full of several beliefs in the same old possibility named "God".
I am sure it is the other way round. Ever since the "idea" [philosophical] of God emerged no person has ever proved God exists as real positively.

History of mankind?? once it was so obvious "the Earth is flat" as based on normal observation, but that has been proven wrong with additional knowledge. God's existence at present is so obvious to the majority, but with additional knowledge and thinking power, God is an impossibility.

As I had demonstrated, the idea of God persisted only because it has a critical psychological utility to deal with an inherent existential crisis.

As for my syllogism "God is an impossibility" show me where has I failed on this argument?
I am a progressive human being, a World Citizen, NOT-a-theist and not religious.
Prismatic567
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2854
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2014 4:35 am

Re: God is an Impossibility

Postby Prismatic567 » Fri Oct 20, 2017 7:38 am

Mr Reasonable wrote:Until you get someone here to make those claims, I'll refer you to my previous post. Look man, if you don't want to believe in a god, that's ok. But I'm not gonna let you get by with bad arguments.

I've literally never heard any religious person make the claims you're making in their name about any god. So you should be able to see why I'm skeptical about your argument, even without acknowledging the thing about needing a god to be impossible, then needing that impossible god to prove your point, and even without the whole burden or proof game.
"I've literally never heard any religion person??"
Maybe your exposure is to lay-religious believers who are merely "sheeps".
Try researching on theologian philosophers on their views of an ontological supremely perfect being.
I suggest you read up on the ontological God.
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/onto ... arguments/

    In the seventeenth century, René Descartes defended a family of similar arguments. For instance, in the Fifth Meditation, Descartes claims to provide a proof demonstrating the existence of God from the idea of a supremely perfect being.
    Descartes argues that there is no less contradiction in conceiving a supremely perfect being who lacks existence than there is in conceiving a triangle whose interior angles do not sum to 180 degrees. Hence, he supposes, since we do conceive a supremely perfect being—we do have the idea of a supremely perfect being—we must conclude that a supremely perfect being exists.
I am a progressive human being, a World Citizen, NOT-a-theist and not religious.
Prismatic567
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2854
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2014 4:35 am

Re: God is an Impossibility

Postby James S Saint » Fri Oct 20, 2017 11:02 am

Another fallacy will show up in your definition of "perfect" (not to mention your definition of a "god").
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25976
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: God is an Impossibility

Postby Alf » Fri Oct 20, 2017 1:41 pm

Prismatic567 wrote:
Alf wrote:Many people have tried to show that "God is an impossibility". All of them have failed. That does not prove the existence of God, but it shows clearly that God is a possibility. And there is another evidence: History of mankind. It is full of several beliefs in the same old possibility named "God".

I am sure it is the other way round.

So you are also one of those who have failed.

Prismatic567 wrote:Ever since the "idea" [philosophical] of God emerged no person has ever proved God exists as real positively.

And also the other way round: No person has ever proved God does not exist.

Prismatic567 wrote:History of mankind?? once it was so obvious "the Earth is flat" as based on normal observation, but that has been proven wrong with additional knowledge.

The flat Earth has not much to do with the existence of God, with the theodicy.

Please, read that part of my post again. It is obvious that you did not understand what I wrote:
Alf wrote:History of mankind. It is full of several beliefs in the same old possibility named "God".
This means that humans have always believed in God, because they have always believed in a possibility, in God as a possibilitiy!

Prismatic567 wrote:God's existence at present is so obvious to the majority but with additional knowledge and thinking power, God is an impossibility.

Again, this is the other way round. And, unfortunately or fortuantely, the majority believes in God, and the number of this majority increases from day to day.

Prismatic567 wrote:As I had demonstrated, the idea of God persisted only because it has a critical psychological utility to deal with an inherent existential crisis.

As for my syllogism "God is an impossibility" show me where has I failed on this argument?

I have shown it. You have not shown a syllogism, but a wishful thinking.

Show me that "God is a contradiction" (one of your false premises).
Show me that a "contradiction is impossible" (one of your false premises).
Show me that "absolute perfection is an impossibility" (one of your false premises).
Show me that "God is an impossibility" (one of your false conclusions).
User avatar
Alf
 
Posts: 234
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2017 12:07 am

Re: God is an Impossibility

Postby iambiguous » Fri Oct 20, 2017 7:16 pm

Magnus Anderson wrote:James is a moron who thinks that beliefs can transcend probability.
In other words, that beliefs can be more than merely more or less probable.
Basically, a dumb absolutist who thinks that if he's 100% certain about something that that something has no choice but to happen.


Magnus,

As you know, my own interest in God and religion revolves almost entirely around the existential relationship between the behaviors that we choose on this side of the grave and our imagined fate on the other side of it.

And then in closing the gap between what we profess to believe about it "in our head" and the extent to which we able to demonstrate to others that what we believe is true is that which all rational men and women are, in turn, obligated to believe as well.

In that context, how then are you not as well an absolutist [or what I call an objectivist] in regard to your own value judgments "here and now"?

What would really intrigue me, in other words, is a discussion between you and James in which you connect the dots [substantively] between a moral narrative relating to a "conflicting good" that we are all likely to be familiar with, and your respective beliefs about the role that God [or No God] plays in the behaviors that you choose.

On another thread perhaps.

Though I do agree with you that James's "100% certain" convictions seem clearly to be embedded in the assumption that if he thinks something is true that makes it true.

Though, admittedly, that, as well, is predicated only on the extent to which I really do understand either one of you.
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
And here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=194382

tiny nietzsche: what's something that isn't nothing, but still feels like nothing?
iambiguous: an exchange between Pedro and Smears?
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 38629
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: God is an Impossibility

Postby Magnus Anderson » Fri Oct 20, 2017 8:18 pm

Prismatic567 wrote:If meaning = "the end, purpose, or significance of something:"
http://www.dictionary.com/browse/meaning
then human-liked aliens has meaning but has a low degree of meaning.


The word "meaning" has many different . . . meanings. And these meanings cannot be reduced to a single meaning. We should accept that fact instead of trying to reduce the irreducible.

The concept of perfect circle is meaningless in the sense that it does not refer to anything that can be experienced. Human-like aliens, zombies, etc are all meaningful words because they refer to something that can be experienced even though the probability of experiencing these things is extremely low.

Biguous wrote:In that context, how then are you not as well an absolutist [or what I call an objectivist] in regard to your own value judgments "here and now"?


Does simply having an opinion make you an absolutist? No. In order to be an absolutist you must think that your opinion regarding some state of reality cannot turn out to be wrong.

Beliefs can only be more or less probable/likely. When someone comes along and denies this you can be sure you are dealing with an absolutist.

I think that if you don't drink water for more than a week that you will die. But this is not an absolute truth. This is merely an outcome with an extremely high probability. As Hume said, the future is under no obligation to mimic the past. It can be anything it wants. If it wants to, it can give us humans who can go without water for months or even years.
"Let's keep the debate about poor people in the US specifically. It's the land of opportunity. So everyone has an opportunity. That means everyone can get money. So some people who don't have it just aren't using thier opportunities, and then out of those who are using them, then most squander what they gain through poor choices, which keeps them poor. It's no one else's fault. The end."

Mr. Reasonable
Magnus Anderson
Philosopher
 
Posts: 4723
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2014 7:26 pm

Re: God is an Impossibility

Postby Prismatic567 » Sat Oct 21, 2017 2:39 am

Alf wrote:
Prismatic567 wrote:Ever since the "idea" [philosophical] of God emerged no person has ever proved God exists as real positively.

And also the other way round: No person has ever proved God does not exist.
To rely on this [no proofs god exists] as primary is insulting one's own intelligence.

In any case, my syllogism above show that a God cannot exists in the first place because God is an impossibility.

Prismatic567 wrote:History of mankind?? once it was so obvious "the Earth is flat" as based on normal observation, but that has been proven wrong with additional knowledge.

The flat Earth has not much to do with the existence of God, with the theodicy.
It is the same, i.e. blinded to the more refined truth of reality.

Please, read that part of my post again. It is obvious that you did not understand what I wrote:
Alf wrote:History of mankind. It is full of several beliefs in the same old possibility named "God".
This means that humans have always believed in God, because they have always believed in a possibility, in God as a possibility!
In the first place possibility is not reality. Possibility is merely wishful thinking until one can provide solid proofs a god exists.
As I had shown, god is an impossibility, thus no point hoping for god to be possibly real.

Prismatic567 wrote:God's existence at present is so obvious to the majority but with additional knowledge and thinking power, God is an impossibility.

Again, this is the other way round. And, unfortunately or fortunately, the majority believes in God, and the number of this majority increases from day to day.
As I had stated majority's belief do not equal to truth of reality. Note flat Earth, Sun going orbiting the Earth, and the likes. What is needed is proofs to justify one's proposition.

Prismatic567 wrote:As I had demonstrated, the idea of God persisted only because it has a critical psychological utility to deal with an inherent existential crisis.


As for my syllogism "God is an impossibility" show me where has I failed on this argument?

Alf wrote:I have shown it. You have not shown a syllogism, but a wishful thinking.

Show me that "God is a contradiction" (one of your false premises).
Show me that a "contradiction is impossible" (one of your false premises).
Show me that "absolute perfection is an impossibility" (one of your false premises).
Show me that "God is an impossibility" (one of your false conclusions).

You don't seem to understand the principles of syllogism?

Stating 'your false premise' is not an argument at all.
I am a progressive human being, a World Citizen, NOT-a-theist and not religious.
Prismatic567
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2854
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2014 4:35 am

Re: God is an Impossibility

Postby omar » Sat Oct 21, 2017 3:12 pm

Prismatic567 wrote:Here is an argument Why God is an Impossibility.

There are two types of perfection for philosophical consideration, i.e.

    1. Relative perfection
    2. Absolute perfection

1. Relative perfection
If one's answers in an objective tests are ALL correct that is a 100% perfect score.
Perfect scores 10/10 or 7/7 used to be given to extra-ordinary performance in diving, gymnastics, skating, and the likes. So perfection from the relative perspective can happen and exist within man-made systems of empirically-based measurements.

2. Absolute perfection
Absolute perfection is an idea, ideal, and it is only a thought that can arise from reason and never the empirical at all.
Absolute perfection is an impossibility in the empirical, thus exist only theoretically.
Examples are perfect circle, square, triangle, etc.

Generally, perfection is attributed to God. Any god with less than perfect attributes would be subjected to being inferior to another's god. As such, God has to be absolutely perfect which is the ontological god, i.e. god is a Being than which no greater can be conceived.

So,
    PI. Absolute perfection is an impossibility
    P2. God imperatively must be absolutely perfect
    C.. Therefore God is an impossibility.

Can any theists counter the above?


This is an argument for why a type of god is impossible, i.e., a perfect god. You set up a device that rates god using the absolute measure of perfection when in fact all our finite selves can apprehend is the relative measure of perfection. The ontological god has the argumentative weakness of whom is doing the conceiving. So, P1 is only true from an empirical perspective and not of essence. God might perfect in a way we cannot conceive. P2, sure, god has to be absolutely perfect, but since such absolute is not empirically apprehensible, we still have to entretain the theoretical possibility of a theoretical absolute perfection. In other words the classic response to the problem of evil, which you haven't manage to defeat. C does not follow without adding a lot more. The empirical experience of absolute perfection is impossible, according to your argument. The existence of a perfect circle is theoretical because of the observer's limitations and not because it is impossible itself, like a square circle. A circle might be theoretically perfect and yet errors in the observer's conception will leave us, empirically, with a a relative perfection. An absolutely perfect God is impossible because an absolute observer is impossible. Does not mean however that such god is impossible but that having an absolute perception is. An absolutely perfect God, in-himself, remains a theoretical possibility.
omar
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3337
Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2005 2:52 am
Location: Where Crocs thrive

Re: God is an Impossibility

Postby James S Saint » Sat Oct 21, 2017 3:14 pm

iambiguous wrote:I do agree with you that James's "100% certain" convictions seem clearly to be embedded in the assumption that if he thinks something is true that makes it true.

I think it is true with 100% certainty when I think there is no alternative.

What is Your standard for 100% certainty?
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25976
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: God is an Impossibility

Postby Magnus Anderson » Sat Oct 21, 2017 3:38 pm

"No alternative" simply means that there is no other possibility that is more likely.

For example, if my past experience contains a billion white swans and zero black swans then I have no other choice, which is to say, I have "no alternative" other than to conclude (or assume, expect, predict, etc) that every single swan in the future will also be white. This, however, does not mean that every single swan in the future will be white. The map is not the territory. Or in plain terms, what you expect will happen is not the same as what will happen.

Many people cannot accept this fact. One has no choice but to wonder why? And the answer is because they cannot act knowing that they might be wrong.
"Let's keep the debate about poor people in the US specifically. It's the land of opportunity. So everyone has an opportunity. That means everyone can get money. So some people who don't have it just aren't using thier opportunities, and then out of those who are using them, then most squander what they gain through poor choices, which keeps them poor. It's no one else's fault. The end."

Mr. Reasonable
Magnus Anderson
Philosopher
 
Posts: 4723
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2014 7:26 pm

Re: God is an Impossibility

Postby James S Saint » Sat Oct 21, 2017 4:16 pm

Magnus Anderson wrote:"No alternative" simply means that there is no other possibility that is more likely.

Only in your twisted mind.

"No" means none, zero, zilch, not "unlikely".

But then, you arbitrarily make up your own language, so....
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25976
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: God is an Impossibility

Postby Magnus Anderson » Sat Oct 21, 2017 4:25 pm

James S Saint wrote:"No" means none, zero, zilch, not "unlikely".


Yes, that's what I said. But you're not listening.
"No alternative" means that there is NO OTHER POSSIBILITY that is more likely.
The number of possibilities that are more likely is none, zero, zilch.

Can anyone else here see what a retard this guy is?

But then, you arbitrarily make up your own language, so....


I am not inventing a new language. What I am doing is I am properly interpreting currently existing language.
Unlike you who's taking it literally (because you suffer from a mild form of autism.)
"Let's keep the debate about poor people in the US specifically. It's the land of opportunity. So everyone has an opportunity. That means everyone can get money. So some people who don't have it just aren't using thier opportunities, and then out of those who are using them, then most squander what they gain through poor choices, which keeps them poor. It's no one else's fault. The end."

Mr. Reasonable
Magnus Anderson
Philosopher
 
Posts: 4723
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2014 7:26 pm

Re: God is an Impossibility

Postby phyllo » Sat Oct 21, 2017 4:37 pm

It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn't matter how smart you are. If it doesn't agree with experiment, it's wrong.

Richard P. Feynman


In this case :

It doesn't matter how beautiful your syllogism is, it doesn't matter how smart you are. If it doesn't agree with observations, then it's wrong.

God is discovered through observations. Either there is sufficient evidence of the existence of God or there is not. God does not spring into existence nor does He cease to exist because of some words on a page.
phyllo
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 12121
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 1:41 am

Re: God is an Impossibility

Postby James S Saint » Sat Oct 21, 2017 4:44 pm

Magnus Anderson wrote:"No alternative" means that there is NO OTHER POSSIBILITY that is more likely.
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25976
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: God is an Impossibility

Postby Magnus Anderson » Sat Oct 21, 2017 4:58 pm

Let's take a look at how the retard's twisted mind, which he's now trying to project onto me, works.

When he says "alternative" he does not mean what normal people mean when they use that word. When someone who's normal says that "there is no alternative but to die if you go without water for more than a week" what they are saying is that "there is no alternative but to expect or to conclude or to predict that a person who goes without water for more than a week will die". This does not mean that the person will die. It simply means that we are expecting that the person will die. What normal people mean when they say "alternative" is an alternative to some assumption, belief, expectation, prediction, etc. The retard, on the other hand, uses the word "alternative" to mean an alternative to what's going to happen. When the retard says "there is no alternative but to die if you go without water for more than a week" he is meaning it literally i.e. that nothing else can happen other than death. Here, we can clearly see that he's confusing one's expectations of what's going to happen (map) with what's going to happen (territory.)
"Let's keep the debate about poor people in the US specifically. It's the land of opportunity. So everyone has an opportunity. That means everyone can get money. So some people who don't have it just aren't using thier opportunities, and then out of those who are using them, then most squander what they gain through poor choices, which keeps them poor. It's no one else's fault. The end."

Mr. Reasonable
Magnus Anderson
Philosopher
 
Posts: 4723
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2014 7:26 pm

Re: God is an Impossibility

Postby Magnus Anderson » Sat Oct 21, 2017 5:05 pm

James S Saint wrote:
Magnus Anderson wrote:"No alternative" means that there is NO OTHER POSSIBILITY that is more likely.


What a moron.
By possibility I mean assumption, belief, expectation, prediction, etc.
We choose which one of the many possible expectations regarding some future state we are going to adopt.
We do not choose what's going to happen. We choose what we're going to believe what's going to happen.
And we do so by assigning a probability value to each one of the possible expectations and then choosing the expectation that has the highest probability.
When someone says "there is no alternative" what they mean is "there is no other expectation that is more likely or equally likely".
"Let's keep the debate about poor people in the US specifically. It's the land of opportunity. So everyone has an opportunity. That means everyone can get money. So some people who don't have it just aren't using thier opportunities, and then out of those who are using them, then most squander what they gain through poor choices, which keeps them poor. It's no one else's fault. The end."

Mr. Reasonable
Magnus Anderson
Philosopher
 
Posts: 4723
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2014 7:26 pm

Re: God is an Impossibility

Postby phyllo » Sat Oct 21, 2017 5:12 pm

Flaws in the syllogism.

PI. Absolute perfection is an impossibility
P2. God imperatively must be absolutely perfect
C.. Therefore God is an impossibility.


Both premises are false.
2. Absolute perfection
Absolute perfection is an idea, ideal, and it is only a thought that can arise from reason and never the empirical at all.
Absolute perfection is an impossibility in the empirical, thus exist only theoretically.
Examples are perfect circle, square, triangle, etc.
Absolute perfection is not only possible, it's very common.

Every rock is perfect. It has the characteristics of 'rockness'.
Water is perfect.
Molecules.
Trees.
The universe as a whole.
How can these things be imperfect?
A three legged cat might be imperfect but the majority of cats are perfect.
Generally, perfection is attributed to God.
As soon as you say 'generally', you admit that it does not always apply and so you have undermined premise 2.
Any god with less than perfect attributes would be subjected to being inferior to another's god.
This is not the logical response of a theist.

Typically:
Theist A knows of the existence of God A. Theist B comes along and says that God B is better than God A. Theist A simply says that God B does not exist and that Theist B is mistaken about God B.

If Theist A accepts that God B exists, then he is admitting the existence of multiple gods. That's a big no-no for a monotheist.

The characteristics of Jehovah don't change when somebody says that Vishnu exists.

This one-upsmanship does not need to take place. Therefore, God does not need to be perfect.
phyllo
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 12121
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 1:41 am

Re: God is an Impossibility

Postby Alf » Sat Oct 21, 2017 5:58 pm

Prismatic567 wrote:Blah blah

Show me that "God is a contradiction" (one of your false premises).
Show me that a "contradiction is impossible" (one of your false premises).
Show me that "absolute perfection is an impossibility" (one of your false premises).
Show me that "God is an impossibility" (one of your false conclusions). :!:
User avatar
Alf
 
Posts: 234
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2017 12:07 am

Re: God is an Impossibility

Postby iambiguous » Sat Oct 21, 2017 8:08 pm

Magnus Anderson wrote:
Biguous wrote:In that context, how then are you not as well an absolutist [or what I call an objectivist] in regard to your own value judgments "here and now"?


Does simply having an opinion make you an absolutist? No. In order to be an absolutist you must think that your opinion regarding some state of reality cannot turn out to be wrong.


My take on that is this:

An absolutist/objectivist makes the assumption that the manner in which she construes a value judgment, is the manner in which all rational men and women are obligated in turn to construe it. Thus others can either be "one of us" or "one of them". Then it's only a matter of predicating this assumption on one or another rendition of God, Reason, Science, Nature, etc.

Or you can reject these transcending fonts and acknowledge that your own values are just subjective/subjunctive "existential contraptions" -- one or another rendition of "you're right from your side, I'm right from mine".

What I would suggest however is that you and James start a new thread in which you discuss these speculations as they relate to an actual moral/political context/conflict most here will be familiar with.

In other words, instead of an exchange of "general descriptions" like this:

Magnus Anderson wrote:Beliefs can only be more or less probable/likely. When someone comes along and denies this you can be sure you are dealing with an absolutist.


On the other hand this...

Magnus Anderson wrote:I think that if you don't drink water for more than a week that you will die. But this is not an absolute truth. This is merely an outcome with an extremely high probability. As Hume said, the future is under no obligation to mimic the past. It can be anything it wants. If it wants to, it can give us humans who can go without water for months or even years.


...is less a value judgment than a biological imperative. Sooner or later all of us must consume water or we will die. Period.

Though, sure, per Hume's insights regarding the difference between correlation and cause and effect, we can never be absolutely certain even of that.
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
And here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=194382

tiny nietzsche: what's something that isn't nothing, but still feels like nothing?
iambiguous: an exchange between Pedro and Smears?
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 38629
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: God is an Impossibility

Postby James S Saint » Sat Oct 21, 2017 9:15 pm

Magnus Anderson wrote:By possibility I mean assumption, belief, expectation, prediction, etc.
We choose which one of the many possible expectations regarding some future state we are going to adopt.
We do not choose what's going to happen. We choose what we're going to believe what's going to happen.
And we do so by assigning a probability value to each one of the possible expectations and then choosing the expectation that has the highest probability.
When someone says "there is no alternative" what they mean is "there is no other expectation that is more likely or equally likely".

..just in your little world of insecurity and self-doubt.

There can never be a possible until there is an impossible. And "impossible" doesn't mean "unlikely" (to real people anyway). Impossible means that it is 100% certain that it does not exist at all. It means a contradiction is logic.
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25976
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: God is an Impossibility

Postby Magnus Anderson » Sun Oct 22, 2017 2:08 am

James S Saint wrote:..just in your little world of insecurity and self-doubt.


That would be your sorry state of mind projected onto me. Apparently, you think that if a man does not consider his opinions infallible that he is necessarily insecure and full of self-doubt. That's not how every mind in this world works. But it certainly is how YOUR mind works. If you know that your opinions can turn out to be wrong, you are filled with insecurity and self-doubt. Very familiar to you, isn't it? Basically, you cannot act without first convincing yourself that your beliefs are infallible i.e. that they cannot turn out to be wrong. Normal people do not have such psychological problems.

There can never be a possible until there is an impossible.


You are full of these stupid claims that are backed up by no evidence whatsoever.

And "impossible" doesn't mean "unlikely" (to real people anyway). Impossible means that it is 100% certain that it does not exist at all. It means a contradiction is logic.


You aren't real people, James. The word "impossible" means exactly what I said it means. It means "extremely unlikely".
"Let's keep the debate about poor people in the US specifically. It's the land of opportunity. So everyone has an opportunity. That means everyone can get money. So some people who don't have it just aren't using thier opportunities, and then out of those who are using them, then most squander what they gain through poor choices, which keeps them poor. It's no one else's fault. The end."

Mr. Reasonable
Magnus Anderson
Philosopher
 
Posts: 4723
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2014 7:26 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Religion and Spirituality



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: phenomenal_graffiti