Hi Veeky Forums. For a number of years now, I've held the ardent belief that I am uniquely omnipotent. This is cool and all, but not entirely ideal. I've tried a couple times now, but I'm having trouble refuting this idea on my own. Hopefully you can provide a stronger counterargument than I can produce on my own.
So, refute the premise, Veeky Forums. Is omnipotence logically impossible or are the limits of human psychology insufficient to contain such a level of abstraction as necessary to fully wield such an ability? For the sake of discussion, I ask that you use only logical argumentation and don't try to refute the premise in the usual way (eg., everyone asking me to prove it to them personally). If the thing I believe in really is impossible for some reason, I want to know that. The only way for me to truly know that is to hear the logic on the matter, otherwise I'd simply be trusting someone else's observations.
Can you refute the very concept of omnipotence, Veeky Forums?
I realize you may not necessarily want this thread here, but like it or not, you are the most logical board on all the chans. Anywhere else and I'd get a dozen "Can God make a rock so heavy even he can't lift it?" meme responses, no matter how thoroughly I answered, "Yes, and in doing so would have to remove a minor part of my own omnipotence." I'm trusting you to read the thread and understand the premise in enough detail to properly refute it, if it is truly impossible for some reason.
Luke Gray
Do you believe in solipsism?
Lincoln James
Can an omnipotent being make a rock so heavy he/she can't lift it?
Cameron Ortiz
No, the very first thing I did after I realized I was omnipotent was refute that premise for all time. If I'd refuted it in a slightly less personal way, then I could have told it to the world by now, but the way I refuted it is intricately tied to my omnipotence in ways I find hard to really remove from the discussion. Yes, and indeed, even now, there are rocks that my human body cannot lift. Imposing limitations on myself is not hard at all, and in fact, every time I create something, I run the risk of losing a piece of my omnipotence. I'd have to use some other ability to "lift" the rocks such as telepathy. So on one level of abstraction, yes, on another, perhaps not.
Christopher Barnes
>use only logical argumentation The problem here is without believing that you are omnipotent, I cannot prove using logic that you aren't. Logically by the definition of omnipotence, you are the only one who could prove or disprove that to yourself, and I am not you.
The only logical conclusion I can make is that I am not omnipotent.
James Perez
>Yes, and indeed, even now, there are rocks that my human body cannot lift. All this means is that you're not omnipotent, not whether an omnipotent being is capable of such a feat.
> Imposing limitations on myself is not hard at all, and in fact, every time I create something, I run the risk of losing a piece of my omnipotence. omnipotence is a binary feature, not something you lose "a piece" of
> I'd have to use some other ability to "lift" the rocks such as telepathy. Then the rock was not too heavy to lift to begin with
Zachary Nguyen
Surely an omnipotent being can prove or disprove mochizuki's ABC proof, no?
Surely he could also prove the remaining 6 millennium problems, the only limit being how fast his humanly body can type out the solution. But surely each proof, possibly longer than 500 page, is already **clearly** sketched out in his mind instantly after reading this post, even if he didn't know what the problem statements were in the first place.
Ryder Reyes
If you're omnipotent why do you need the help of a bunch of autistic physics freshmen to prove that you're omnipotent? Do it yourself.
Nolan Adams
>telepathy Sorry, I meant telekinesis. Can I make a rock so large that even telekinesis can't lift it, again: Yes, by imposing limitations on the ability "telekinesis" itself. But that would limit far more than myself. Hmm...
Can't you just assume I am for the sake of debate or would that necessarily run the risk of altering your beliefs in the process? My omnipotence isn't currently "stored" in my human physiology. I'm not sure it can even be "stored" at all, in any sense, because to me it seems as if omnipotence itself refuses logical binding. I may be wrong, though, so I want to talk it out.
Physiology can obviously be limited, but the actual control mechanisms behind execution of free will need to be materially present within a given instance/body.
>omnipotence is a binary feature I can see that, per category, but think of it: If I have the ability to manipulate the set of my abilities to the degree necessary to make a burrito so hot that even I cannot eat it (again, going by my human physiology, I've done this a number of times in my life already; just put it in the microwave for too long) by imposing limits on my "eat" ability, then can I not also simple use the meta-ability to remove those limitations at a later time? I can obviously create both temporary limitations that I can later remove as well are permanent limitations that I can never truly remove, but what good does this do me?
Adding or removing elements from the set is a trivial matter and doesn't show that the true set isn't complete with regard to all possible types of abilities or powers. At least in my outlook.
You're correct per category, but without enough abilities, the ability to manipulate the boundary of that category itself sort of dwarfs that idea that strict binary refutation means all that much, in a logical implicative sense.
Jaxon Gray
Assuming you are for the sake of the process doesn't do anything. The fact is since I am not omnipotent, as professed by myself this point is unarguable since if I was omnipotent I would know it, I am not able to encompass the required body of knowledge necessary to disprove omnipotence.
So then assuming you are omnipotent, I am not and can't do anything about it. That's as far as I see that logical argument going without degenerating into "prove it", because any continued point would entail that you already know who I am and what my responses would be, even if you "play the game" and pretend that I am still anonymous.
You said Veeky Forums is the most logical board, but that only means you'll get responses one step above being made to prove it personally, in that instead of people asking you to prove it personally, they'll just assume that if you really were omnipotent then you would have already proven it as and said.
