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.
philosopher19
Posts: 35
Joined: September 21st, 2018, 1:34 pm

Re: Why Existence is necessarily omnipotent and omniscient

Post by philosopher19 » October 4th, 2018, 9:36 am

Burning ghost wrote:
October 3rd, 2018, 4:09 pm
It’s not “expanding into” anything. The Universe is everything and the “expansion” is merely a convenient way of explaining a mathematical abstract principle in common parse.

I imagine you’re thinking along these lines?: http://digg.com/video/what-is-the-unive ... nding-into
Ok, we can agree that the universe is not infinite because it had a beginning. If it's not infinite, it can't be Existence. It is necessarily the case that Existence has always existed and will always exist as you cannot have something come from nothing. Are we in agreement on this?

User avatar
chewybrian
Posts: 239
Joined: May 9th, 2018, 7:17 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Epictetus
Location: Florida man

Re: Why Existence is necessarily omnipotent and omniscient

Post by chewybrian » October 4th, 2018, 10:39 am

philosopher19 wrote:
October 4th, 2018, 9:36 am
Ok, we can agree that the universe is not infinite because it had a beginning. If it's not infinite, it can't be Existence. It is necessarily the case that Existence has always existed and will always exist as you cannot have something come from nothing. Are we in agreement on this?
You are saying that the universe had a beginning, but "you can not have something come from nothing". Aren't you contradicting yourself in the process?

Burning ghost
Posts: 2806
Joined: February 27th, 2016, 3:10 am

Re: Why Existence is necessarily omnipotent and omniscient

Post by Burning ghost » October 4th, 2018, 10:42 am

Not in slightest. No idea what you’re talking about.
AKA badgerjelly

philosopher19
Posts: 35
Joined: September 21st, 2018, 1:34 pm

Re: Why Existence is necessarily omnipotent and omniscient

Post by philosopher19 » October 5th, 2018, 6:49 am

chewybrian wrote:
October 4th, 2018, 10:39 am
philosopher19 wrote:
October 4th, 2018, 9:36 am
Ok, we can agree that the universe is not infinite because it had a beginning. If it's not infinite, it can't be Existence. It is necessarily the case that Existence has always existed and will always exist as you cannot have something come from nothing. Are we in agreement on this?
You are saying that the universe had a beginning, but "you can not have something come from nothing". Aren't you contradicting yourself in the process?
Existence and the universe are not the same thing. The universe is a part of Existence. It is not Existence. It can't be Existence because the universe had a beginning.

Existence is necessarily infinite. If you said that Existence is necessarily finite, then that would amount to the paradox of something coming from nothing. You can't have paradoxes in any system. Whether it's science, law, philosophy or maths. Paradoxes are always unacceptable.

philosopher19
Posts: 35
Joined: September 21st, 2018, 1:34 pm

Re: Why Existence is necessarily omnipotent and omniscient

Post by philosopher19 » October 5th, 2018, 6:53 am

Burning ghost wrote:
October 4th, 2018, 10:42 am
Not in slightest. No idea what you’re talking about.
You can't have something come from nothing. If the universe is finite and the universe is all there is to Existence, then you end up with the problem of something coming from nothing. We cannot allow for this problem as our belief system would be paradoxical. So the only conclusion we can rationally make is that the universe is just a part of Existence. It is not Existence as a whole.

Burning ghost
Posts: 2806
Joined: February 27th, 2016, 3:10 am

Re: Why Existence is necessarily omnipotent and omniscient

Post by Burning ghost » October 5th, 2018, 7:44 am

Phil -

Are you aware of the possible problems with the words you’re using when other people read them? If so why respond with the above?

If not then if existence is all there is (as you define) where did “existence” come from? Moving the goal posts doesn’t change the argumentation you are using. I am saying the universe may or may not be infinite - although physicists generally use the term as if the universe is infinite - and to talk of something coming from nothing is nothing more than resorting to a non-imaginable concept of “nothing”. Nothing is the absence of something, it doesn’t exist alone on it’s own - if it does then your position falls flat on its face there because you’ve made the claim of “nothing” existing.

I assume you’ve either not yet found they correct terminology to use here and/or you’ve made a mistake you’re not yet ready to face within your reasoning due to lack of caprice and/or blindsightedness.

If you’re baffled by my response then tell me what “Existence” is please. If you cannot then your claim is empty. You do very much appear to be appealing to Kantian “positive noumenon” as if there is a discernable “thing in and of itself” rather than seeing this claim as being nothing more than “negative noumenon” and the region of rational explanation.
AKA badgerjelly

User avatar
chewybrian
Posts: 239
Joined: May 9th, 2018, 7:17 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Epictetus
Location: Florida man

Re: Why Existence is necessarily omnipotent and omniscient

Post by chewybrian » October 5th, 2018, 8:25 am

philosopher19 wrote:
October 5th, 2018, 6:49 am
chewybrian wrote:
October 4th, 2018, 10:39 am


You are saying that the universe had a beginning, but "you can not have something come from nothing". Aren't you contradicting yourself in the process?
Existence and the universe are not the same thing. The universe is a part of Existence. It is not Existence. It can't be Existence because the universe had a beginning.

Existence is necessarily infinite. If you said that Existence is necessarily finite, then that would amount to the paradox of something coming from nothing. You can't have paradoxes in any system. Whether it's science, law, philosophy or maths. Paradoxes are always unacceptable.
Then what did the universe come from? It seems you are implying it came from nothing, if it sprung into existence. Yet, you say something can not come from nothing. What was existence prior to the universe? Was there matter, or space? If not, how did matter and space 'begin', or where were they hiding prior to the universe if there was no universe for them to exist in?

User avatar
chewybrian
Posts: 239
Joined: May 9th, 2018, 7:17 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Epictetus
Location: Florida man

Re: Why Existence is necessarily omnipotent and omniscient

Post by chewybrian » October 5th, 2018, 8:35 am

philosopher19 wrote:
October 5th, 2018, 6:49 am

Existence and the universe are not the same thing. The universe is a part of Existence. It is not Existence. It can't be Existence because the universe had a beginning.

Existence is necessarily infinite. If you said that Existence is necessarily finite, then that would amount to the paradox of something coming from nothing. You can't have paradoxes in any system. Whether it's science, law, philosophy or maths. Paradoxes are always unacceptable.
What about the idea of repeating big bangs? The universe may have always existed, yet not always in the same form. It may change to energy (?) and back to matter. There is no ice outdoors in Kentucky in June, yet there might be in January. It does not spring into and out of existence, but rather changes form as conditions change. Perhaps it is the same with the universe, and it has always existed in some form or another? If that is the case, perhaps the universe represents all of existence, yet it also does not seem impossible that there are more universes outside ours.

philosopher19
Posts: 35
Joined: September 21st, 2018, 1:34 pm

Re: Why Existence is necessarily omnipotent and omniscient

Post by philosopher19 » October 5th, 2018, 1:58 pm

Burning ghost wrote:
October 5th, 2018, 7:44 am
Phil -

Are you aware of the possible problems with the words you’re using when other people read them? If so why respond with the above?

If not then if existence is all there is (as you define) where did “existence” come from?


It did not come from anything. Existence has always existed and will always exist. There are no rational alternatives. You can try to give an alternative to Existence being infinite, but I promised you that I'll be able to demonstrate to you how that would amount to a paradox.
Moving the goal posts doesn’t change the argumentation you are using.


Saying Existence is infinite is not moving the goal posts.
I am saying the universe may or may not be infinite - although physicists generally use the term as if the universe is infinite - and to talk of something coming from nothing is nothing more than resorting to a non-imaginable concept of “nothing”.
We know our universe has a beginning. If it has a beginning, then by definition, it cannot be infinite as that which is infinite had no beginning. It has always existed and will always exist. That's what it is to be infinite.
Nothing is the absence of something, it doesn’t exist alone on it’s own - if it does then your position falls flat on its face there because you’ve made the claim of “nothing” existing.
Almost all things can change to something else or go somewhere else. But they never go into non-existence. My claim is that non-existence (where non-existence = the negation of Existence), is absurd.
If you’re baffled by my response then tell me what “Existence” is please. If you cannot then your claim is empty. You do very much appear to be appealing to Kantian “positive noumenon” as if there is a discernable “thing in and of itself” rather than seeing this claim as being nothing more than “negative noumenon” and the region of rational explanation.
Existence is that which is infinite, omnipresent, omnipotent and omniscient. Some think that that's energy but I doubt it. Essentially, anything that is in line with the aforementioned adjectives, is Existence.

Can you show me any paradoxes or contradictions in the outline that I've given of Existence?

I promise that if you give me any outline other than the above, I'll be able to show you how it amounts to a paradox.

philosopher19
Posts: 35
Joined: September 21st, 2018, 1:34 pm

Re: Why Existence is necessarily omnipotent and omniscient

Post by philosopher19 » October 5th, 2018, 2:04 pm

chewybrian wrote:
October 5th, 2018, 8:25 am
Then what did the universe come from? It seems you are implying it came from nothing, if it sprung into existence. Yet, you say something can not come from nothing. What was existence prior to the universe? Was there matter, or space? If not, how did matter and space 'begin', or where were they hiding prior to the universe if there was no universe for them to exist in?
What was before our universe is probably unknown. What we do know is that it wasn't non-existence/nothingness. There is a difference between non-existence (something that is absurd) and something that is unknown (something that exists but we've not empirically observed or understood it yet)

Either way, ultimately that which is omnipresent (whatever it may be), is necessarily infinite. Otherwise, you have the problem of something coming from nothing. Our universe, is just a part of it. We know this because we've empirically observed that our universe had a beginning. This means that it's not infinite.

Burning ghost
Posts: 2806
Joined: February 27th, 2016, 3:10 am

Re: Why Existence is necessarily omnipotent and omniscient

Post by Burning ghost » October 5th, 2018, 2:06 pm

Phil -

I’m sorry. I tried and I failed. I suggest you reread my questions and your responses and work it out for yourself.

Nothing more to say on the matter until you address your own words after you’ve distanced yourself from them. Leave the discussion alone for a month is my best suggestion and then come back to this thread and attack your own words as best you can.

Good luck.

In the mean time hope you dip into some other topics.
AKA badgerjelly

philosopher19
Posts: 35
Joined: September 21st, 2018, 1:34 pm

Re: Why Existence is necessarily omnipotent and omniscient

Post by philosopher19 » October 5th, 2018, 2:14 pm

chewybrian wrote:
October 5th, 2018, 8:35 am
What about the idea of repeating big bangs? The universe may have always existed, yet not always in the same form. It may change to energy (?) and back to matter. There is no ice outdoors in Kentucky in June, yet there might be in January. It does not spring into and out of existence, but rather changes form as conditions change. Perhaps it is the same with the universe, and it has always existed in some form or another? If that is the case, perhaps the universe represents all of existence, yet it also does not seem impossible that there are more universes outside ours.
There's no problem or paradox with repeated big bangs.

The universe had a beginning, so it can't be infinite. Things within Existence can change (you can have repeated big bangs, different universes being generated, the universes changing and so on) but Existence itself (whatever it may be) has always been and will always be infinite and omnipresent. It sustains everything, including matter, the universe, and so on.

If the universe represents all of existence, how can there be any existing thing outside of it?

philosopher19
Posts: 35
Joined: September 21st, 2018, 1:34 pm

Re: Why Existence is necessarily omnipotent and omniscient

Post by philosopher19 » October 5th, 2018, 2:22 pm

Burning ghost wrote:
October 5th, 2018, 2:06 pm
Phil -

I’m sorry. I tried and I failed. I suggest you reread my questions and your responses and work it out for yourself.

Nothing more to say on the matter until you address your own words after you’ve distanced yourself from them. Leave the discussion alone for a month is my best suggestion and then come back to this thread and attack your own words as best you can.

Good luck.

In the mean time hope you dip into some other topics.
I believe I read your questions and responded to all of them. If I'm mistaken, what have I not addressed?

In any case, thank you, and good luck to you too.

User avatar
chewybrian
Posts: 239
Joined: May 9th, 2018, 7:17 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Epictetus
Location: Florida man

Re: Why Existence is necessarily omnipotent and omniscient

Post by chewybrian » October 6th, 2018, 9:35 am

philosopher19 wrote:
October 5th, 2018, 2:14 pm
There's no problem or paradox with repeated big bangs.
No, I don't think so.
philosopher19 wrote:
October 5th, 2018, 2:14 pm
The universe had a beginning, so it can't be infinite.
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.
philosopher19 wrote:
October 5th, 2018, 2:14 pm
If the universe represents all of existence, how can there be any existing thing outside of it?
There couldn't be by definition. It seems beyond our capacity to know if this is the case or not. Once you have the idea of three dimensions in your head, it's hard to imagine nothing on the other side, though (not even empty space).

philosopher19
Posts: 35
Joined: September 21st, 2018, 1:34 pm

Re: Why Existence is necessarily omnipotent and omniscient

Post by philosopher19 » 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.

Post Reply