Originally Posted by really
I thought I explained enough; I broke it down. You're saying it is a limitation that something is unlimited?
No. I'm saying that unlimited ability is contradictory and impossible to exist. I'm saying that an unlimited being by definition would be able to impose limitations on itself, which creates an impossible paradox. The problem here is with the definition. It creates a hypothetical situation which would be impossible to have in reality. This is a result inherent of the properties of the concept, not of semantic maneuvering.
Originally Posted by really
You're saying it is a limitation that something is unable to contradict itself?
Yes. The inability to do something. That's what I consider a limitation. Even the lack of the ability to reduce one's ability is a limitation. Unable, lack of ability, limitation. These words should not apply in any event to a being free of inability and limitations. A being "by which all things are possible" would be such an example.
Originally Posted by really
Is existence "limited" to existence only?
I can't make sense of this question. Is existence only itself? I guess so.
Originally Posted by really
This is just word games.
It doesn't have to be word games. You could stop trying to exclude certain abilities from the arsenal of an all-powerful being as you do here:
Originally Posted by really
The "limit" is defined as a restriction of ability. Yet to be able to be limited is not actually an ability to begin with, in the context of the unlimited, and that itself, by definition, has no reason to be contradictory. That which is infinite is not limited to itself, it is unlimited itself. "Restriction to restriction" is redundant.
Restriction to be able to restrict is not redundant. To be able to be limited is not an ability. That's correct. To be able to limit yourself is an ability. Being limited is having something done to yourself. Limiting something (including yourself) is you doing something. If an ability is something that you can do, limiting yourself is an ability.
Originally Posted by really
If something infinite can intrinsically and simultaneously be finite, elaborate, and explain why that should prove that it is only infinite. If this itself, is your argument against it, you're mixing paradigms.
It's almost like you're getting my point. Infinite power doesn't make sense. It's illogical. I can't make sense of it to you.
|
|
Bookmarks