• Philosopher19
    Hi all. If interested in the nature of Existence, consider the following:

    Core to the argument: If a given belief/theory is semantically inconsistent (as in it is hypothetically impossible for it be true) then it must be rejected.

    1) Existence being infinite accounts for why all semantics are meaningful. It is inconsistent to believe that a finite existence can contain an infinite number of semantics. A finite computer cannot have access to an infinite number of meanings/semantics, unless it had access to the cloud and the cloud was infinite.

    2) Round squares, married bachelors, non-existence existing, sitting and standing at the same time, these are all hypothetical impossibilities. What makes something a hypothetical impossibility? That it cannot exist. That it cannot be true of Existence. It cannot be true of Existence that there is a man sitting and standing at the same time. Or that there is a round square. Or that non-existence exists. Or that Existence does not exist. Or that Existence is finite.

    3) If something is hypothetically impossible, then it is not meaningful or understandable. You cannot understand a round square. Round has meaning. Square has meaning. Round square has no meaning. There can be nothing that is both hypothetically impossible and understandable/meaningful at the same time.

    4) Given 3, If something is meaningful or understandable, then it is certainly not hypothetically impossible. To reiterate: ALL hypothetical impossibilities are meaningless and not understandable.

    5) Perfection = that which no greater than can be conceived of. There is nothing better than a perfect existence. If existence is imperfect, then perfection (a perfect existence) is hypothetically impossible.

    6) If perfection is hypothetically impossible, then it should be meaningless and not understandable (see 4). Again, ALL hypothetical impossibilities are meaningless and not understandable.

    7) Perfection is meaningful/understandable, therefore, perfection is not a hypothetical impossibility.

    8 ) If Existence is perfect, then perfection is not hypothetically impossible. If Existence is imperfect, then perfection is hypothetically impossible. We understand perfection, therefore, perfection is not hypothetically impossible. Therefore, Existence is perfect.

    Existence is perfect is the same as saying God exists. This is because a perfect existence logically entails that everyone gets what they truly deserve (it would be imperfect otherwise). This logically requires the omnipresent (Existence) to be omnipotent and omniscient. It logically requires: Existence = God (pantheism)
  • Jamal
    This discussion was merged into Can God do anything?

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.