Well, first of all, I would invite anyone reading this to go read the other thread (it’s fairly short). I’m not sure this characterization of that thread is entirely accurate.
I was the last poster on that thread (so I guess I’m responsible for killing it off
). Allow me to re-post what I wrote (hope I don’t kill THIS one off, too!).
"Maybe what we’re grappling with here is the scholastic distinction between act and potential. Aristotle and Aquinas refer to God as “Active Intellect,” because everything known by God has to be known by God all the time, actively. Humans, on the other hand, have potential–in the language you are using, we can “discover” truths new to us, or have “creative” thoughts.
But this isn’t a limitation on God’s ability, but on OUR ability. You seem to be saying that to have potential for improvement (like us, in our potential to discover new knowledge) is a better state of affairs than to have no potential for improvement (like God, in His complete knowledge). Your “ability to think new thoughts” (our position) is not a better state of affairs than to think all knowledge completely and simultaneously (God’s position). Which is better, the potential thought or the actual thought?"
Labeling an attribute as a deficiency is very effective spinning. It seems that the only way to avoid the omnipotency contradiction is to label it unimportant.
I did not use the word improvement. A creative thought comes without any particular value except in the opinion of its creator.
Let’s get to the meat of your argument.
I declare unequivocally that the the ability to have new thoughts, to invent ideas where none have gone before, is such a wonderful and powerful ability that without it there would be no point in living.
It is the only quality which sets man apart from animals The ability to have useful creative thoughts is a prized quality among successful civilizations, because without it we would have no art, architecture, medical advancements, interesting literature, etc. There would be no math, no language, no machinery. We’d never have invented the wheel or the spear, and would be reduced to chasing down our food and strangling it barehanded— provided we first saw some other critter do the same thing.
It is fine for us to sit around and declare that God is omniscient because we think this the optimal state of being, but there is a cost to omniscience.
Without creative thought, life would be dreadfully dull. I invite you to step outside your philosophical world of actuality and potentiality and experiment in the world of reality. For one week, have no imagination.
To complete this experiment you’ll need three recordings, one of a news program, one movie, and one sporting event. An Oprah Winfrey show may be substituted for the sporting event. Every day, watch the same news program, movie, and sports event or Oprah show three times.
Before doing this experiment, get a video camera and record the statements and actions of everyone you come into contact with for a single day. You’ll need their cooperation. They are to memorize what they said and did using these recordings, then do and say exactly the same things every day during your non-imaginative week.
Do the same thing with your conversations on the recorded day. Memorize them, and repeat them exactly every day. It would be best not to have interesting conversations. Stick with, “How do you like this weather, dude?” and a repertoire of conventional phrases.
You may go on this site (and others) provided that each day you only reread posts which you’ve read before, and retype your replies, word for word, without change. Do not allow your mind to think of better ways of saying something, or anything different to say. (Lots of luck!)
Throughout this week, do not answer the phone or engage in any conversation for which you do not know every word in advance. Eliminate all potential for surprise. Check the weekly weather reports in advance so that you know if it will rain, snow, or be hot or cold.
You are getting the idea. Identical food for every meal, every day— eaten at exactly the same time of course. I’d suggest a nutritious gruel served at room temperature. A daily laxative will insure regularity. 5 glasses of water drunk in evenly divided amounts at the same times each day. Of course, no TV, radio, or social contacts except for the repeated ones. Stay in your home, since the outside world is unpredictable.
You can figure out other rules in the spirit of this experiment on your own.
If you don’t have a week to spend, try Plan B, a simple two day experiment. Tape either the Oprah show, Judge Judy, or one afternoon soap opera episode. Spend two days during which every free waking moment you watch the same program, with commercials, again and again. If you tape an hour-long program, you must watch that program at least 12 times each day. Watch or listen to nothing else. Avoid social contacts. Just watch the same soap opera. Of course, gruel for every meal. Same schedule, same routine. No Catholic Forum. No email. Don’t even turn your computer on.
After completing either experiment you will have a clue as to what the life of an omniscient God would be like. Nothing new, no surprises. Every event is a replay. For such a God there is no such thing as an “opening night” or surprise ending, for He saw every movie ever made in our time long before the Stone Age.
I contend without reservation or equivocation that “potentiality” is a far superior state of being than “actuality.” It is what being alive and conscious is all about.
If I was an omniscient and omnipotent God, the first thing I’d order up for myself would be a healthy case of amnesia. Then I’d go visit one of my planets and watch soap operas, if I remembered how.
