Freethought & Rationalism Archive

WinAce · 06-20-2002, 08:36 AM

Is it possible to prove from within your own mind, beyond a reasonable doubt, that you know everything?

In other words, if a being was 'omniscient', would it have any way of knowing whether it, in fact, was omniscient, or if there was something in a realm that it couldn't observe?

Would it be possible to prove to itself objectively that it wasn't living in a Matrix-like world with the illusion of omniscience?

If it couldn't know for sure, then that puts the kibosh on any idea of omniscience, doesn't it?

Are there are coherent objections to this, other than the standard 'we can't question God' or 'God is perfectly omniscient, hence he just knows'?

How many philosophers have discussed this idea in depth, and which ones? I just know I can't be the first one to think of this

Koyaanisqatsi · 06-20-2002, 08:56 AM

Omniscience, by "its" definition, overrides such a trap.

If one is "omniscient," then one knows all, including whether or not one is merely deluding oneself into simply thinking one is "omniscient."

It's good work if you can get it, but easily avoided.

Impossible to prove, but easily avoided by a simple call to definition.

WinAce · 06-20-2002, 09:23 AM

So basically it's my second possible objection, i.e., 'God is omniscient so he just knows'... the worst part is that it actually seems to work, as illogical as it is.

That definition seems to be impossible for some reason, though. How do you know you're omniscient as opposed to merely possessing the illusion of omniscience?

Of course, if you already 'had' omniscience you would know, but the nature of consciousness seems to override the possibility of 100% certainty, hence omniscience...

I'm in way over my head here.

[ June 20, 2002: Message edited by: Allan ]</p>

advocate_11 · 06-20-2002, 09:34 AM

Well, I believe the follow-up to that would be to say that God has always been omniscient. That is, the nature of reality is and always has been that there is an omniscient being.

There does not appear to be anything illogical about the statement. You must realize that it is merely an assertion. What may be illogical are attempts to prove that such a being exists, or to reconcile omniscience with other properties of this being.

[edit]
Maybe what you mean is that you believe there to be something illogical about omniscience and the type of consciousness that you think is claimed of God.

[ June 20, 2002: Message edited by: advocate_11 ]</p>

06-20-2002, 09:53 AM

It should also be remembered that it is entierly possible for God himself to be deluded about his omniscience and to convince us of it despite that.

Theli · 06-20-2002, 01:21 PM

Of course omniscience assumes that god is correct about his knowledge.
I would say the problem still exists, though.
God knows everything within the space of his own existence. Weither his "space" exists inside another reality (matrix, the thirteenth floor) he can only assume one or the other.

God might be wrong about his omniscience. There is no way for us (or him) to prove he's not.
Our speculations on his supposed omniscience is just that - speculations. We have no way to observe any omni.

Automaton · 06-20-2002, 02:57 PM

Yes, by definition, God would know that he is omniscient, but that doesn't make this definition meaningful. You are right. From God's own perspective, he would never be able to prove that he was not a lesser, created God with all knowledge except of that. Since there is something coherent that God can never know, God cannot be omniscient.

[ June 20, 2002: Message edited by: Automaton ]</p>

WinAce · 06-20-2002, 04:24 PM

It seems I've actually brought up something that wasn't stupid this time... Yay me.

So apparently, if you had true omniscience this might not pose a logical challenge (although you still couldn't prove yourself right unless you took it as axiomatic that you were right, so does that still pose a problem to the idea of omniscience? I'd say it does).

Koyaanisqatsi · 06-21-2002, 05:17 AM

Well, we're talking about an absolute that is therefore ultimate (and subsequently is impossible to attain, aka, does not exist), which means necessarily that there is no gray area and no fuzzy logic. There can be no degrees of omniscience.

So, to claim that someone is "omniscient" is to claim that this someone knows everything, including whether or not his omniscience is "legitimate" or merely an illusion.

Heading to Hell · 06-21-2002, 01:48 PM

Or alternately, it was just a concept made up by the early Church to keep the believers in line.

06-20-2002, 08:36 AM	#1
WinAce Beloved Deceased Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Carrboro, NC Posts: 1,539	Is omniscience logically contradictory on its own? Is it possible to prove from within your own mind, beyond a reasonable doubt, that you know everything? In other words, if a being was 'omniscient', would it have any way of knowing whether it, in fact, was omniscient, or if there was something in a realm that it couldn't observe? Would it be possible to prove to itself objectively that it wasn't living in a Matrix-like world with the illusion of omniscience? If it couldn't know for sure, then that puts the kibosh on any idea of omniscience, doesn't it? Are there are coherent objections to this, other than the standard 'we can't question God' or 'God is perfectly omniscient, hence he just knows'? How many philosophers have discussed this idea in depth, and which ones? I just know I can't be the first one to think of this

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

06-20-2002, 08:56 AM	#2
Koyaanisqatsi Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2000 Location: Yes, I have dyslexia. Sue me. Posts: 6,508	Omniscience, by "its" definition, overrides such a trap. If one is "omniscient," then one knows all, including whether or not one is merely deluding oneself into simply thinking one is "omniscient." It's good work if you can get it, but easily avoided. Impossible to prove, but easily avoided by a simple call to definition.

06-20-2002, 09:23 AM	#3
WinAce Beloved Deceased Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Carrboro, NC Posts: 1,539	So basically it's my second possible objection, i.e., 'God is omniscient so he just knows'... the worst part is that it actually seems to work, as illogical as it is. That definition seems to be impossible for some reason, though. How do you know you're omniscient as opposed to merely possessing the illusion of omniscience? Of course, if you already 'had' omniscience you would know, but the nature of consciousness seems to override the possibility of 100% certainty, hence omniscience... I'm in way over my head here. [ June 20, 2002: Message edited by: Allan ]</p>

06-20-2002, 09:34 AM	#4
advocate_11 Junior Member Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: unknown Posts: 22	Well, I believe the follow-up to that would be to say that God has always been omniscient. That is, the nature of reality is and always has been that there is an omniscient being. There does not appear to be anything illogical about the statement. You must realize that it is merely an assertion. What may be illogical are attempts to prove that such a being exists, or to reconcile omniscience with other properties of this being. [edit] Maybe what you mean is that you believe there to be something illogical about omniscience and the type of consciousness that you think is claimed of God. [ June 20, 2002: Message edited by: advocate_11 ]</p>

06-20-2002, 09:53 AM	#5
Synaesthesia Guest Posts: n/a	It should also be remembered that it is entierly possible for God himself to be deluded about his omniscience and to convince us of it despite that.

06-20-2002, 01:21 PM	#6
Theli Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Sweden Posts: 2,567	Of course omniscience assumes that god is correct about his knowledge. I would say the problem still exists, though. God knows everything within the space of his own existence. Weither his "space" exists inside another reality (matrix, the thirteenth floor) he can only assume one or the other. God might be wrong about his omniscience. There is no way for us (or him) to prove he's not. Our speculations on his supposed omniscience is just that - speculations. We have no way to observe any omni.

06-20-2002, 02:57 PM	#7
Automaton Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 717	Yes, by definition, God would know that he is omniscient, but that doesn't make this definition meaningful. You are right. From God's own perspective, he would never be able to prove that he was not a lesser, created God with all knowledge except of that. Since there is something coherent that God can never know, God cannot be omniscient. [ June 20, 2002: Message edited by: Automaton ]</p>

06-20-2002, 04:24 PM	#8
WinAce Beloved Deceased Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Carrboro, NC Posts: 1,539	It seems I've actually brought up something that wasn't stupid this time... Yay me. So apparently, if you had true omniscience this might not pose a logical challenge (although you still couldn't prove yourself right unless you took it as axiomatic that you were right, so does that still pose a problem to the idea of omniscience? I'd say it does).

06-21-2002, 05:17 AM	#9
Koyaanisqatsi Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2000 Location: Yes, I have dyslexia. Sue me. Posts: 6,508	Well, we're talking about an absolute that is therefore ultimate (and subsequently is impossible to attain, aka, does not exist), which means necessarily that there is no gray area and no fuzzy logic. There can be no degrees of omniscience. So, to claim that someone is "omniscient" is to claim that this someone knows everything, including whether or not his omniscience is "legitimate" or merely an illusion.

06-21-2002, 01:48 PM	#10
Heading to Hell Junior Member Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Devon, UK Posts: 58	Or alternately, it was just a concept made up by the early Church to keep the believers in line.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.