|
|
Re: One vs. Two vs. Many
[Re: ROMAC]
#66697
03/15/06 14:32
03/15/06 14:32
|
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 5,377
USofA
fastlane69
OP
Senior Expert
|
OP
Senior Expert
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 5,377
USofA
|
That post was actually my inspiration.  But it is not what I'm looking for in this thread. In that post, you CONCLUDE from your own facts and opinions three things: god doesn't exist, god is amoral, god is not all powerful. This is not the same as what I'm asking here. I'm conceding that god exists as my axiomatic foundation. Then, I'm asking to show that only one god exists or many exist. And I'm asking to do it in the scientific way that many are using to show that god does exist. Not quite the same. 
|
|
|
Re: One vs. Two vs. Many
[Re: fastlane69]
#66698
03/15/06 14:46
03/15/06 14:46
|
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 54
AndersA
Junior Member
|
Junior Member
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 54
|
Quote:
[...]I'm conceding that god exists as my axiomatic foundation.[...]
That is not a very meaningful axiom on it's own. Any theorem based on that is also based on the meaning of the term god. Depending on the properties god have you will be able to prove that there is one god or many.
The only meaningful theorem derivable from your axiom is that at least something exists
|
|
|
Re: One vs. Two vs. Many
[Re: fastlane69]
#66701
03/15/06 15:24
03/15/06 15:24
|
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 54
AndersA
Junior Member
|
Junior Member
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 54
|
I know perfectly well what an axiom is and I still don't think your "god exists" axiom is useful for anything than stating that "something exists". You have to add more axioms.
You may prove many things if you add different axioms:
1)
Ok. I add the axiom A = "for all a,b if a is god and b is god, then a = b". From that it is trivial to derive the theorem "there is only one that is god".
2)
Now instead of the axiom A, I add the axiom B = not A. From that it's trivial to derive the theorem "there may be two or many that are god"
3)
Let's check what happens if we add A and B. Well from that you can derive a contradiction and it's a logic truth that from a contradiction everything can be derived. One example is the theorem "there is no god".
Last edited by AndersA; 03/15/06 15:43.
|
|
|
Re: One vs. Two vs. Many
[Re: AndersA]
#66702
03/15/06 15:47
03/15/06 15:47
|
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 5,377
USofA
fastlane69
OP
Senior Expert
|
OP
Senior Expert
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 5,377
USofA
|
Quote:
I know perfectly well what an axiom is and I still don't think your "god exists" axiom is useful for anything than stating that "something exists".
You are missing the point then for that is the ONLY thing that axiom is meant to show: that something exists and then use that as a foundation for further investigation as to HOW MANY somethings there are.
Quote:
Ok. I add the axiom A = "for all a,b if a is god and b is god, then a = b". From that it is trivial to derive the theorem "there is only one that is god".[/quopte]
You've proven nothing. Your axiom STARTS with the idea that a is the same god as b. You've derived nothing and merely proved state your axiom as your conclusion.
All the same, a more useful proof would look like:
a = god1
b = god2
[...]
therefore either a=b (and there is one god) or A DNE B (and there are at least two gods). It's the [...] that you skipped over that I'm mostly interested in.
If we find the latter, we would expand thusly
a = god1
b = god2
c = god3
[...]
therefore either a=b DNE c or a=c DNE b or b=c DNE a (and there are only two gods) or a DNE b DNE c (and there are at least 3 gods).
Again, it's the [...] that is interesting to me, whether it be from science or logic.
|
|
|
Re: One vs. Two vs. Many
[Re: AndersA]
#66704
03/15/06 16:55
03/15/06 16:55
|
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 535
Michigan
ICEman
Developer
|
Developer
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 535
Michigan
|
I think what he is saying is that, assuming that God(s) exist as the given for this discussion (which means that you will have a hard time stomaching this discussion and an even harder time contributing if you dont believe in one at all)
BUT...here is my logic for the monotheistic school of thought.
It's possible that many Gods can have existed, but.. to me, the creation of a universe what looks a certain way, is composed of black space, with normal matter, and logical math and science... is the result of one perspective.
Take the universe as a game. If you have more than one designer, typically the game comes out looking like it was made with the ideas of several designers. Very seldom do they agree or reach commonalities about one specific way the game looks or plays..and I believe our universe was made by one specific vision, and not the visions of many, otherwise it would work as tho it were designed by several beings with different ideas of how it should work.
It's a very weak argument, but I think the inability to create with concensus on the design rules out multiple creators..and had the reached a concensus, it wouldve been redundant to use multiple Gods with the same level of power to make the agreed upon design.
I'm ICEman, and I approved this message.
|
|
|
|
