Why Existence is necessarily omnipotent and omniscient

Use this philosophy forum to discuss and debate general philosophy topics that don't fit into one of the other categories.

This forum is NOT for factual, informational or scientific questions about philosophy (e.g. "What year was Socrates born?"); such homework-help-style questions can be asked and answered on PhiloPedia: The Philosophy Wiki. If your question is not already answered on the appropriate PhiloPedia page, then see How to Request Content on PhiloPedia to see how to ask your informational question using the wiki.
User avatar
Posts: 1122
Joined: May 5th, 2018, 5:53 pm

Re: Why Existence is necessarily omnipotent and omniscient

Post by ThomasHobbes » October 6th, 2018, 4:42 pm

philosopher19 wrote:
October 6th, 2018, 1:04 pm
chewybrian wrote:
October 6th, 2018, 9:35 am
I'm not sure this is correct, in terms of time. Does a new universe begin with every big bang, if they do repeat? If all the same matter and energy is conserved, though transformed in various ways, couldn't you say that it was still 'the universe' at each step? If so, then you could speculate that the universe has always existed.

In terms of space, then yes, it makes sense that the universe can't stretch out infinitely if it started from one spot, no matter how fast things might be moving.
I'm not against the idea of the universe as being Existence. I'm against the idea of Existence as being anything other than infinite, omnipresent, omnipotent and omniscient. If the universe has these traits, then it can be considered as Existence. If not, then it would be paradoxical for us to say that it is.
That the universe is omnipresent is just a childish tautology.
That the universe is omnipotent is just silly.
That the universe is infinite is beyond empirical verification.

It is simply an abuse of language to suggest that the universe or existence if omniscient. If not it is just absurdly stupid. In fact you might as well say that the universe or existence is omni-stupid.

Post Reply