On Mar 5, 4:52 pm, "Stathis Papaioannou" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 3/6/07, Tom Caylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Mar 2, 4:54 am, "Stathis Papaioannou" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On 3/2/07, Tom Caylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > God would be outside of the plenitude, and thus would break the
> > > > meaning/moral circularity inherent in the plenitude, breaking its
> > > > symmetry of meaningless whiteness/blackness and bringing order. He
> > > > basically would be in charge of the evolution of the countless
> > > > histories of the universes. But this seems superfluous to what is
> > > > needed for meaning for us in this universe. Thus why bother with
> > > > multiverses? You haven't shown how multiverses give meaning.
> > > What about considering God as identical with the plenitude? In a sense,
> > both
> > > are omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent, transcendent as well as
> > immanent,
> > > outside of time and space, the source of all things, and the plenitude
> > has
> > > the additional attribute of necessary existence, which is
> > philosophically
> > > contentious in God's case (the ontological argument again).
> > Your proposal totally erases God from the picture (which is precisely
> > what you want to do, so it is successful, in your view).
> > This leaves the original problem as I've explained: The
> > "picture" (Everything) is totally blank to begin with.
> > > No doubt you will say that the plenitude is not a person and cannot
> > provide
> > > love, morality and meaning. Let's assume this is true for the sake of
> > the
> > > discussion, and let's assume that there is a separate non-plenitude God
> > who
> > > creates a real world imbued with these gifts. But even God can't destroy
> > > mathematics, so the plenitude will give rise to creatures in parallel
> > with
> > > God's real world. These simulated creatures will not know they are
> > simulated
> > > and will not know that there is no overseeing God, no ultimate meaning
> > etc.:
> > > they will go about their business in a delusional state just as if they
> > were
> > > in the real world. The question is, how can I tell whether I am in the
> > real
> > > world or in the godless (or deistic, or pantheistic) plenitude?
> > > Stathis Papaioannou
> > You are hypothetically putting God in charge of only part of reality.
> The point is, God is not in charge of mathematics, even though he might know
> all mathematics and have chosen the mathematical laws that physical reality
> will follow. If you accept some version of comp, conscious beings will arise
> who are beyond his control. But, I suppose, you could avoid all this by
> saying that only beings specially imbued with souls can be conscious.
> Stathis Papaioannou
You seem to be saying there are only two options. Either God IS the
plenitude (i.e. the set of all possible universes, leaving aside the
meaning of "possible" for now), or God is in charge of (but not IS)
only part of the plenitude. What about God being in charge of
Everything (rather like Jason's "Everything is in the mind of God")?
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to firstname.lastname@example.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at