A Lesson in Debate and Convincing People

[MMMark]

Sat. 12/04/07 22:07 EDT
.post #125

[url=A Lesson in Debate and Convincing People - #6 by Anarcho-libertarian]

@Anarcho-libertarian

[/url]C. S. Lewis and Walter Block (who is an atheist) have explained how this question is sophistry, meaning it makes grammatical sense, but has no intelligible meaning.

Thanks! I did not know this. After a quick search, I found the following wikipedia article on the subject:

Omnipotence paradox

According to this article, the C.S. Lewis answer is but one of several. My “answer” seems closer to that proposed by Descartes (emphasis mine):

Some philosophers maintain that the paradox can be resolved if the definition of omnipotence includes Descartes’ view that an omnipotent being can do the logically impossible. In this scenario, the omnipotent being could create a stone which it cannot lift, but could also then lift the stone anyway. Presumably, such a being could also make the sum 2 + 2 = 5 become mathematically possible or create a square triangle. This attempt to resolve the paradox is problematic in that the definition itself forgoes logical consistency.…

It would seem that, as with so many other things, there is not universal agreement!

Try seeing things from the Cartesian point of view, then see if what I said sounds any better.