The Problem with Omniscience: Philosophy Forums

Page: 1 2 3

The Problem with Omniscience

Jason
Graduate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 09, 2002
Total Topics: 12
Total Posts: 160

Posted 04/15/02 - 01:22 PM:	#1
This attribute is common at least in the Judeo-Christian tradition of defining what God is. However, there are some logical/epistemological problems with the term itself. I think omniscience is impossible, not that it is merely unlikely that anything could have omniscience, but that anyone could logically "know all". The problem, and it is only a problem if we take all of these premises to be true, might be put like this--all of these propositions cannot be accepted: (1) God is omniscient. (2) To be omniscient means to know all. (3) There is knowledge that can only be derived from a "limited perspective," i.e. subjectivity. (4) Omniscient beings do not have a limited perspective. "Knowing all"--in consideration of the problem of limited perspective--seems "limited" itself: how can you know all without really knowing all? Cheers, Jason

Ryentha
Aspirant

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Mar 27, 2002
Total Topics: 0
Total Posts: 22

Posted 04/15/02 - 05:50 PM:	#2
If God can read all thoughts, or knows all thoughts, he would then know all. Also, who said God could not actually feel what you feel? I can't talk in fancy words, sorry. But I do know that if you think of a creator as though it is a super-human, then it will be impossible.

Baron Max
Tenured Poster

Usergroup: Sponsors
Joined: Apr 01, 2002
Total Topics: 176
Total Posts: 4118

Posted 04/16/02 - 04:04 AM:	#3
Jason, in my own mind, the very "definition" of god transcends our ability to understand 'him' or 'his' actions/thoughts, etc. If we change our "definition" of god and attribute some/any "weakness", is it still god whom we're discussing? Baron Max

Baron Max
Tenured Poster

Usergroup: Sponsors
Joined: Apr 01, 2002
Total Topics: 176
Total Posts: 4118

Posted 04/16/02 - 04:10 AM:	#4
Originally posted by Ryentha I can't talk in fancy words, sorry. Well, thats too bad, Ryentha! You'll have to submit yourself for punishment of twenty lashes with a soft, wet noodle. Okay, on second thought, I've read your post again and while you may not be able to "talk" with fancy words, your typing seems to be acceptable. However, you should learn to type a few extra "fancy words", they fool some people some of the time. Oh, good post, by the way! Baron Max

macon
Assistant Professor

Usergroup: Sponsors
Joined: Mar 19, 2002
Total Topics: 18
Total Posts: 335

Posted 04/16/02 - 10:54 AM:	#5
What if all things are a thought in God's mind?

macon
Assistant Professor

Usergroup: Sponsors
Joined: Mar 19, 2002
Total Topics: 18
Total Posts: 335

Posted 04/16/02 - 11:21 AM:	#6
----Quote:Originally posted by Ryentha ---- I can't talk in fancy words, sorry. Ryentha, no one on here can express themselves better than you. Fancy words are most often used to disguise the fact that there is little or no substance in what someone is actually saying.

Jason
Graduate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 09, 2002
Total Topics: 12
Total Posts: 160

Posted 04/16/02 - 12:06 PM:	#7
Originally posted by Ryentha If God can read all thoughts, or knows all thoughts, he would then know all. Also, who said God could not actually feel what you feel? Good point, Ryentha. I was not saying that God cannot read all thoughts and know all thoughts, I was questioning whether God could develop beliefs and knowledge that came from a limited perspective like ours. Re: Baron Max. The point of attributing weakness, at least in this case, is to question the very concept of God. If you say that God is "incomprehensible" then you have no problem, at least in terms of there being no logical contradiction involved in your idea of God. But often I find it that people use the "incomprehensible" attribution as a fallback when other attributions are called into question. If He is unknowable, then don't give 25 other attributions of God (like the Catholic church has done). Just some thoughts .

Jason
Graduate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 09, 2002
Total Topics: 12
Total Posts: 160

Posted 04/16/02 - 12:09 PM:	#8
Originally posted by macon What if all things are a thought in God's mind? Read Berkeley!

Just call me cheeze!
Graduate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 15, 2002
Location: Glasgow, UK
Total Topics: 17
Total Posts: 172

Posted 04/16/02 - 12:36 PM:	#9
1. Does omniscience mean knowing everything per se, or more knowing everything THAT it is possible to know. If it is the latter, then who sets how much it is possible to know? You'd assume it to be God, or any equivalent consciousness- but then if he/she/it sets the limits on what it is possible to know, surely they must know OUTSIDE of those boudries so that they can set a limit. But you cannot think outside these boundries. 2. Would an omniscient consciousness KNOW that it is omniscient? again, wouldn't you have to be able to think outside of the boundries of what is possible to know, to know whether you knew all it was possible to know. but this is impossible. 3. Yes, you could always resort to "God's ways are incomprehensible", but it doesn't get you very far. "Nothing is just as good as something about which nothing can be said"- unless there it is absolutely nescessary to resort to this for a coherent picture of things, we shouldn't do it. Occam's razor should be used where things are added as over-complication. There is no logical nessesity for there to be a god who acts beyond our comprehension, so fantasising things like that just confuses things.
(Maybe) its helpful to think of my words as more akin to remixed glitch-core than of finely structured melodic verse.

Josh
Initiate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 04, 2002
Total Topics: 0
Total Posts: 16

Posted 04/16/02 - 03:26 PM:	#10
Just a quick post: The fact that we have a limited perspective in this world implies that there are things that are incomprehensible to us. However, I do agree with those who say that unless we are able to comprehend God in some way, then we can't talk about much at all. Maybe then we will only be left with logical considerations about what God could be. -- Josh

Page: 1 2 3

You don't have permission to post.