AU_FinalProject - PARADOXES Content Omnipotence

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–4. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: PARADOXES Content Omnipotence Paradox...............................p.4 Heaven is hotter thatn hell paradox...........P.6 Zero of eleas paradox...............................p.7 1. OMNIPOTENCE PARADOX The omnipotence paradox is an apparent contradiction in the notion of an omnipotent (all-powerful) being (such as God, or Superman, or the government). An omnipotent being can do absolutley anything. So can an omnipotent being create a stone that is too heavy for him to lift? If he can create it, then there is one thing he can't do: lift the stone. If he can't create it, then there is one thing he can't do: create such a stone. Either way, there is something he can't do, which contradicts the assumption that he is omnipotent. This is a paradox. It has been taken by some to show that there cannot be an omnipotent being, and by others to show merely that the concept of omnipotence is misunderstood (for example, that it does not involve the power to bring about logical impossibilities). Richard Dawkin PARADOXES Philosophical Responses One common response points out that this question makes implicit assertions that are inconsistent and self-contradictory. The phrase omnipotent being implicitly states that any phrase such as a stone too heavy for him to lift is meaningless. Thus, one solution to this type of paradox is to say that it is logically impossible for both entities to exist at the same time. So, there cannot be both an omnipotent God and an unliftable rock. 1. Extraction: Therefore, a response is available if it is already accepted that God cannot do what is logically impossible 2. Logical Conclusion: God cannot do what is logically impossible. 3. Assumption: It is logically impossible for there to be a stone God cannot move. 4. Logical Result: God cannot create such a stone. This necessarily accepts the view that even an omnipotent God cannot violate the laws of logic, and indeed this whole paradox can be seen as a strong reason for such a view. The philosopher Averroes advanced the omnipotence paradox for this reason (for which he was condemned by Bishop Tempier), although instead of phrasing it in terms of stones, he asked whether God could create a triangle whose internal angles did not add up to 180 degrees. (Note that the later discovery of non-Euclidean geometry does not resolve this question. One might as well ask, "If given the axioms of Riemannian geometry, can God create a triangle whose angles do not add up to less than 180 degrees?" In either case, the real question is whether, once God has decided to establish a system of axioms, can He evade the consequences which follow logically from them?) However, the answer above can be restated even if one does not already accept that God cannot do logically impossible things: one can answer that the question is literally meaningless, and therefore there is not even a logically impossible task being set....
View Full Document

Page1 / 7

AU_FinalProject - PARADOXES Content Omnipotence

This preview shows document pages 1 - 4. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online