Peace all
This is from some blog posts that I wrote here if anyone's interested:
https://philosophyneedsgod.wordpress.comConsider the following challenge: Can you think of something that has meaning but can never exist?
The argument in a nutshell, is as follows:
(1) There is existence/x exists
(2) Everything that exists, does so only in existence
(3) We are fully dependent on existence
(4) All minds are limited to what existence allows
(5) Anything that is either rational/comprehensible/understandable, necessarily belongs to existence (existence accommodates it; as in existence has the potential to create it or produce it. This is what makes it a hypothetical possibility and this is why it has meaning. So a unicorn is a potential thing that Existence can produce) On the other hand, anything that is either irrational or incomprehensible is necessarily non-existent (existence does not accommodate it. For example, no square-circles can ever exist, such a phrase is absurd and makes no sense)
(6) ?infinity?, ?eternal?, ?almighty? and ?all knowing?, are all rational concepts that we have an understanding of. So Existence must accommodate these concepts. To deny this is to commit to the paradox of something coming from nothing. Therefore, either:
6a) The potential is there for something to become almighty, or
6b) Something has always been almighty and will always be almighty.
Only that which is all-existing can be almighty and all-knowing because you can't be almighty if you don't have reach or access to all of Existence. Similarly, you can't be all-knowing if you don't have reach or access to all of existence. So:
7) Only Existence can be almighty and all knowing
Existence has always existed and will always exist and nothing can ever take its place or substitute it in any way. Existent beings cannot expand to become that which is all-existing/omnipresent/Existence. Given
7, Nothing can ever become almighty from a non-almighty state. So
6a is impossible/absurd. But the concept of almighty has meaning and we have an understanding of it. It is not like the concept of a square-circle which is clearly an absurdity/contradiction/paradox/non-existence/nothingness.
THEREFORE, Existence must accommodate the concept. So given that it can't be
6a, this leaves
6b. So
6b is necessarily true.
In language and reason, everything belongs to the following 4 categories:
Necessary (Existence, omnipotence, omniscience etc.)
Potential (Anything that can be brought about, so all hypothetical universes, creatures and beings that don't contain any absurdity, contradictions or paradoxes in their definition. An infinite Existence can accommodate all hypothetical possibilities)
Absurd (Absurd is anything that is necessarily non-existent or nothingness; something that have never existed and will never exist, like a square-circle or a married-bachelor)
Unknown (What we can't classify as either of the aforementioned three goes here. For example a 10th sense. There may be beings that have a 10th sense in existence or which would mean existence accommodates it; or, there the phrase 10th sense may be an absurdity like a married-bachelor. Essentially it's unknown to us and so irrelevant in our application of language and reason to it. As in we can't say its necessary, potential or absurd)
Again, can you think of something that has meaning but can never exist?
