Timeline for Does it make sense for an omniscient being to be able to give an answer about the universe without any internal processing?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
12 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 1 at 14:58 | answer | added | Rushi | timeline score: 1 | |
| Feb 1 at 10:04 | answer | added | SacrificialEquation | timeline score: 1 | |
| Feb 1 at 5:37 | comment | added | Double Knot | Actually if you mean a computable God I cannot think of any third option... If God is a constructive TM then due to halting problem there might be a ton of problems even this all powerful computer cannot decide within any of our finite time. If God has to fetch from an infinite database which has discrete rows, then how can God fetch all elements of an uncountable set such as the real interval [0, 1]?... | |
| Feb 1 at 2:04 | comment | added | David Gudeman | I don't think it make sense to suggest that an omniscient being has a mind that works like a computer unless you are imagining a machine with infinite memory and the capacity to do an infinite number of calculation in a finite time. | |
| Jan 31 at 23:50 | comment | added | Doot | @Conifold Make sense to the people on this website! I am very much a philosophy novice and haven't articulated my question so well. I used (a generic) G/god as an example to avoid dealing with an omniscient oracle being a part of the universe. I'm not looking at this from a Christian perspective though - simply at the general idea of omniscience. Like a god, a mortal oracle or a black box as used in computer science or finance. | |
| Jan 31 at 23:18 | comment | added | Doot | @DoubleKnot No, just 2 suggestions! | |
| Jan 31 at 21:33 | comment | added | Conifold | Make sense to whom? Creatures whose way is to parse, reduce and calculate? "God comprehends everything in His intellect by a single act of intuition, and similarly loves everything by a single act of His will", Aquinas. Whether it "makes sense" to us makes little difference, but we do get glimpses of what it might be like when we 'see' complex geometric relations without any calculation. Kant famously analyzed differences between discursive (ours) and intuitive (God's) intellect, describing the latter as having a super-insight of a creator into his creations. | |
| Jan 31 at 19:48 | comment | added | Corbin | The distinction matters in general (without considering physics) but is irrelevant in the face of Bell's theorem (and the Kochen-Specker theorem beyond it!) So, the relevancy is contextual. | |
| Jan 31 at 19:30 | comment | added | Double Knot | Are you sure there're only 2 such mutually exclusive options you described? | |
| Jan 31 at 19:05 | review | Close votes | |||
| Feb 17 at 3:09 | |||||
| S Jan 31 at 17:53 | review | First questions | |||
| Feb 1 at 15:07 | |||||
| S Jan 31 at 17:53 | history | asked | Doot | CC BY-SA 4.0 |