Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: March 29, 2024, 4:13 am

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Omniscience Argument Against God's Existence
#31
RE: Omniscience Argument Against God's Existence
MFM Wrote:The equivalent of what you'e saying is that a square-circle must be a square and circle simultaneously by definition, when my hypothetical argument would be that such a concept is a non-starter because it's incoherent.

I don't have time to respond properly right now, but if we're using metaphors to describe our discussion, then it would be more accurate to say you start off with a square, but then start describing it like it's a circle; you keep assuming things about the square that just don't apply to it.
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it" ~ Aristotle
Reply
#32
RE: Omniscience Argument Against God's Existence
(September 26, 2013 at 10:10 pm)Vincenzo "Vinny" G. Wrote: But isn't that tautological?

Is it? If so, the following should be able to properly get across what I'm saying to you and FallenToReason.


There are two relevant epistemic concerns for this argument:

1) Known unknowns
2) Unknown unknowns

These corresponding to your a) & b) earlier Vinny.

1) refers to things that you know you don't have knowledge of, but you know there is knowledge there to be known. Examples include, say, the number of atoms in my body or whatever is 100 feet below me. I know there is something there to be kniwn, but I don't have knowledge of the truth of what is there.

2) is the important one for the argument. It refers to things that you don't even know that you don't know of, even if you could potentially gain knowledge of them. Examples of this include, well, I don't know, because by definition I can't know! I can give examples that were once unknown unknowns, such as, say, the atom or any concept that at one point no personhad even conceived of there being something to know about there.


Omniscience would mean 1) is not applicable to God. However, 2) refers to a set who's status is always unknown, because it can't be known. Once you become aware of a member of the set, it is no longer in the set, but you are no closer to knowing the set's status (because you can't).

Did that clear things up?
Reply
#33
RE: Omniscience Argument Against God's Existence
I see. But how do we establish the existence of these unknown unknowns? If we merely presume they exist, we are begging the question against omniscience.

Can we establish they exist?
Reply
#34
RE: Omniscience Argument Against God's Existence
There's always at least one unknown unknown: the status of the set of unknown unknowns (i.e you can't even know if the set is empty or not).

It can only be said that you cannot rule out any more due to that single unknown unknown. That alone would seem to invalidate omniscience as a possible attribute I think. Or am I indeed begging the question? Shock
Reply
#35
RE: Omniscience Argument Against God's Existence
(September 26, 2013 at 11:28 pm)MindForgedManacle Wrote: There's always at least one unknown unknown: the status of the set of unknown unknowns (i.e you can't even know if the set is empty or not).

It can only be said that you cannot rule out any more due to that single unknown unknown. That alone would seem to invalidate omniscience as a possible attribute I think. Or am I indeed begging the question? Shock

But is this an actual set of actual unknown unknowns, or is this a mathematical fact?

I'd really like to learn more, so if you have any material to recommend, I'm intrigued!
Reply
#36
RE: Omniscience Argument Against God's Existence
Hm? It's just a set of whom's members can't be known, otherwise they're no longer a part of the set.

I actually got the thrust of the argument from a YouTube video by the YT user "noelplum99". I just tried to put it in a deductive argument. :p His video was titled something like "The Impossibility of Omniscience".
I don't know if this is a legit thing in epistemology though, so I've got no material to recommend. Sad
Reply
#37
RE: Omniscience Argument Against God's Existence
FYI, the fact that you know what the word epistemology means makes me feel more reassured about the future of atheism. Big Grin

Are you familiar with set theory and transfinite arithmetic, btw? I want to develop an argument against God's existence/for atheism but I need someone with some math knowledge.

edit: Found the video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vauFcJAnnTY

So what he's claiming (around 3:12) is that there's a set of "unknown unknowns" by definition cannot be known, and you can be certain that you cannot know them (post-correction).

He notes the possible objection that "Unknown unknowns cannot exist for God if God is omniscient", and his response is "Then the set of unknown unknowns will be empty. But even if the set is empty, God would not know it."

As to whether or not such a set can exist, he says (around 4:14) "We cannot rule out their existence, because if they existed, we would not know."

Thus, we cannot verify the existence of this set. Which is itself no big deal, but the fact that we cannot deny it's existence leaves open the possibility that omniscience is incoherent.

He also has a response video defending his argument:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OOAF7wGB8pE

Here, he says there must be one unknown unknown (3:07) and that unknown unknown is the status of the set of unknown unknowns.
Reply
#38
RE: Omniscience Argument Against God's Existence
Hah, thanks. There are users here much better informed on philosophy than me though. Kepp your eye out for Genkaus, Apophenia, Bennyboy and ChadWooters. Smile

Eh, a bit about set theory, but I'm not really a math guy. Sad There is a physicist on the forums (I'll go find his username), he's probably a better guy to go to. Smile

Could you check out my argument in the following thread? : http://atheistforums.org/thread-19833.html

The physicist here is "little_monkey". Smile Ask him.
Reply
#39
RE: Omniscience Argument Against God's Existence
Sure thing! I was working on a response to Plum's argument, which I think can refute him, although I know I might derail your argument here with my response. I'm not certain of the strength of my objection, however, so I'd like to see it tested.
Reply
#40
RE: Omniscience Argument Against God's Existence
Go for it. Smile
Reply



Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Proving the Existence of a First Cause Muhammad Rizvi 3 758 June 23, 2023 at 5:50 pm
Last Post: arewethereyet
  The existence of God smithd 314 18955 November 23, 2022 at 10:44 pm
Last Post: LinuxGal
  Veridican Argument for the Existence of God The Veridican 14 1599 January 16, 2022 at 4:48 pm
Last Post: brewer
  A 'proof' of God's existence - free will mrj 54 6092 August 9, 2020 at 10:25 am
Last Post: Sal
  [Serious] An Argument Against Hedonistic Moral Realism SenseMaker007 25 2867 June 19, 2019 at 7:21 am
Last Post: The Grand Nudger
  Argument against Intelligent Design Jrouche 27 3066 June 2, 2019 at 5:04 pm
Last Post: GUBU
  Best arguments for or against God's existence mcc1789 22 2716 May 22, 2019 at 9:16 am
Last Post: The Grand Nudger
  The Argument Against God's Existence From God's Imperfect Choice Edwardo Piet 53 7908 June 4, 2018 at 2:06 pm
Last Post: The Grand Nudger
  The Objective Moral Values Argument AGAINST The Existence Of God Edwardo Piet 58 13613 May 2, 2018 at 2:06 pm
Last Post: Amarok
  Berkeley's argument for the existence of God FlatAssembler 130 12970 April 1, 2018 at 12:51 pm
Last Post: GUBU



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)