My simple answer is: An omnipotent being could just as easily reside in paradoxical states as it can reside in coherent states. The problem here is that human logic is applied. For an omnipotent being, it makes no difference whether something is possible or impossible - in fact it would be the very thing that decides over such things. — Hermeticus

Outwith human logic is the world of imagination, fantasies and conjectures. One can then write poetry, novels, and shoot movies.

he could even commit suicide? Why or why not? — Corvus

I think not because an omnipotent subject has not in their mind the debate or thought of being a worthy value. It is that powerful or superior that the subject itself cannot handle about "human emotions" dilemmas.
A normal human being can be settled in some issues as "is this life that worthy?" or "why I do deserve this?", etc... Which can put you on the fragile of gap of committing suicide.
But in an omnipotent subject these matters cannot even exist because it is already a being/non being... Right?

More exactly, could he cease his own omnipotence?

Omnipotence is a fixed state, so no

could he cease his own omnipotence? — InvoluntaryDecorum

Very interesting question. That's why I also defend no because in some terms it looks like omnipotence is related a being/not being state

I think it's not even a stretch to say God has already committed suicide.

Or could it be that the word "omnipotence" is an invented terminology from human imagination?

It could be too because we humans tend to imagine things bigger or better than us, paradoxically...

Omnipotence means all powerful. There's no dispute about that.

The dispute is over what, more precisely, that involves. Does it involve being able to do all things it is logically possible to do, or does it involve being able to do anything at all, including the currently logically forbidden?

I think the answer to that one is obvious - to be able to do the logically forbidden is to have more power than one who is bound by logic. Thus omnipotence involves it.

But either way, God could commit suicide.

If you want to argue that God cannot commit suicide, then you would need to argue that God exists of necessity. But that claim seems incompatible with being omnipotent.

Omnipotence means all powerful. There's no dispute about that. — Bartricks

Omnipotence means the quality of having unlimited or very great power. No problem with very great power, but "unlimited power" is associated with God usually, and creates all sorts of paradoxes when used under the definition.

It doesn't mean 'very great' - it means 'all powerful' (omni means all).

There's what it means and then there's what problems it might generate. It means 'all powerful'. And, like I say, the debate is over whether being all powerful involves being able to do all things logically possible, or anything whatever.

And again, like I say, neither of those conceptions of omnipotence would generate a problem in respect of suicide. You'd need to argue in addition that God exists of necessity. Then that would mean it would be logically impossible for God to cease to exist.

the debate is over whether being all powerful involves being able to do all things logically possible, or anything whatever. — Bartricks

If a being is omnipotent, he can live forever. If he cannot live forever, then he is not omnipotent. — Corvus

According to Bartricks definition of omnipotence god can simultaneously kill and not kill himself.

Sure, it's a contradiction, but that's no problem, he can do anything. :smile:



Further, he can simultaneously be and not be god, can simultaneously be and not be omnipotent. No problem.

:smile:

According to Bartricks definition of omnipotence god can simultaneously kill and not kill himself. — ZzzoneiroCosm

Yes, he 'can' do that. 'Can' doesn't mean 'is'. See? So, it's not an 'actual' contradiction. There are none of those.

Also, what is your objection? Where is the contradiction involved in pointing out that someone who can do anything, can do anything? That's not a contradiction.

Compare this to you. You think that a person who can do anything can't make a rock too heavy to lift. That's an actual contradiction. So if you're so anti contradictions, stop affirming them.

Yes, he 'can' do that. 'Can' doesn't mean 'is'. See? So, it's not an 'actual' contradiction. — Bartricks

Total nonsense and more evidence that you have no philosophical credentials.

Question begging.

So, you think 'can' does mean 'is'? You 'can' think a little more before posting. But are you? No. See?

Yes, he 'can' do that. — Bartricks

God can simultaneously kill and not kill himself?

God can simultaneously be and not be god?

God can simultaneously be and not be omnipotent?

Yes. He 'can' be. He hasn't killed himself, though. He can. He hasn't.

Yes, he 'can' be simultaneously God and not God. But he isn't. He's just God. How do I know? Because the law of non-contradiction is true. The law of non-contradiction says that if a proposition is true, it is not also false. Thus if God is God, he is not also not God. Again: 'can' doesn't mean 'is'. This is something the average 6 year old can grasp.

Can God simultaneously be and not be omnipotent - yes, see above answer.

Because the law of non-contradiction is true. — Bartricks

Can god violate the law of non-contradiction?

God can simultaneously kill and not kill himself? — ZzzoneiroCosm

Yes. He 'can' be. He hasn't killed himself, though. He can. He hasn't. — Bartricks

If god has the power to simultaneously kill and not kill himself how can it be known that he hasn't simultaneously killed and not killed himself?

Because we know that the law of non-contradiction is true.

Have you heard of that law? Who first articulated it?

No? Don't know? It states that if a proposition is true, it is not also false. And Aristotle is credited with having first expressed it.

And we know it is true in the same way that we know 1 + 1 = 2 is true - it is manifest to the reason of virtually everyone.

Some doubt it is true - what are they called and can you name one?

Because... — Bartricks

Answer the question or shut your mouth, doc:

Can god violate the law of non-contradiction? — ZzzoneiroCosm

Because — Bartricks

Answer the question or shut your mouth, doc:

If god has the power to simultaneously kill and not kill himself how can it be known that he hasn't simultaneously killed and not killed himself? — ZzzoneiroCosm

I did. We know the law of non-contradiction is true. And if that law is true, then God is either dead or alive, not both. Now, answer my questions. And if you are not going to, do at least try and say something funny as this exchange is very dull. I have found that discussing philosophy with arrogant idiots can be very stimulating and/or amusing. This is neither. Now, up your game and say something funny or philosophically interesting please, as I am a busy man.

And if that law is true, then God is either dead or alive, not both. — Bartricks

So god lacks the power to be simultaneously alive and dead?

No. He has the power to be dead and alive at the same time. But he is not exercising it. He's alive and not dead. Jeez, I said 'up your game'. Up!

He has the power to be dead and alive at the same time. But he is not exercising it. — Bartricks

So the law of non-contradiction can be violated.

But he is not exercising it. — Bartricks

How do you know he isn't exercising it? What evidence can you present?

So the law of non-contradiction can be violated. — ZzzoneiroCosm

Well, it wouldn't really be violated. It would simply no longer obtain.

How do you know he isn't exercising it? What evidence can you present? — ZzzoneiroCosm

The truth of the law of non-contradiction is evident to reason. That is to say, our reason represents it to be true.

To 'know' something is to have a justified true belief. Justifications are made of normative reasons. And we are aware of normative reasons via our reason.

Why don't you now ask me how I know that, and then to my answer ask 'and how do you know that'. And I can keep giving you the same answer. And we can keep doing that until we die. How about that?

The truth of the law of non-contradiction is evident to reason. — Bartricks

Well, it wouldn't really be violated. It would simply no longer obtain. — Bartricks

How do you know god isn't alive and dead simultaneously?

And how can it be known when in this special case the law of non-contradiction has ceased to obtain?

How do you know god isn't alive and dead simultaneously? — ZzzoneiroCosm

Because I know the law of non-contradiction is true. And if the law of non-contradiction is true, then there is no person who is alive and not alive at the same time. Therefore, God is not alive and dead at the same time.

What is the name of the argument form I just employed above?