Truth!

  • Thread starter Thread starter wittgenstein
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
W

wittgenstein

Guest
Would 1+1 still =2 if God did not exist? Is some truth independent of God? Does even God have to obey the inanimate laws of logic?
 
wittgenstein said:
Would 1+1 still =2 if God did not exist? Is some truth independent of God? Does even God have to obey the inanimate laws of logic?
Click to expand...
Are you calling Logos inanimate, or are you differentiating Logos from logic?
 
OK, OK, I will give a more in depth answer:
  • if God did not exist, there would be no world in which to have math/logic laws would exist. Not even 0 would exist if God did not exist to create it and its lack of entity.
  • even natural law truths are things which God planted.
-“follow” is the key term here. He doesn’t follow logic, He created a world in which logic is even a conceptual possibility. If He kept everything in the world randomized then logic would not be possible. So I guess the question is: does He have to follow the rules of His own game? And the answer is “no” but He graciously chooses to be consistent through all ages and thus, logic is possible and also what He exemplifies.
 
wittgenstein said:
Would 1+1 still =2 if God did not exist? Is some truth independent of God? Does even God have to obey the inanimate laws of logic?
Click to expand...
If God did not exist, there would be nothing. Not even the void of space would exist. I’ve tried contemplating this in the past, and of course, I could not get my pea brain around the concept.
 
-“follow” is the key term here. He doesn’t follow logic, He created a world in which logic is even a conceptual possibility. If He kept everything in the world randomized then logic would not be possible. So I guess the question is: does He have to follow the rules of His own game? And the answer is “no” but He graciously chooses to be consistent through all ages and thus, logic is possible and also what He exemplifies.
Click to expand...
I disagree. What you may be getting at is the fact that human ways of knowing are incomplete. Anyway, it appears to me that you are doubting that human logic is sufficient to find eternal truth. We use logic because it is the most obvious way of seeing things that are true (non-contradictory). For example: Can you draw a square circle? Logic says this is impossible, because by definition a square cannot be a circle.

Extend this further: Can God draw a square circle? The answer is no! Assuming He must keep the definitions the same, there is no possible way. The square, by definition, cannot be circular. It is defined by the fact that it has four corners. A circle is defined by the fact that it has no corners. It can’t be done… by definition. This is logic. Therefore God is constrained by logic. Stated another way, logic can elevate us to eternal truths.
 
Response to 7
See post 5
Post 5 implies that God created logic and can violate logic if he chooses to.
 
Response to post 8
There is a difference in the levels of nothingness! Empty space is more something then the space between two touching objects. Another thing I cannot wrap my mind around is total blindness. A totally blind person does not see black etc. I imagine it is like what we see when we see with our toes,less then nothing!
PS: The grammer of english (subject-predicate) makes expressing such concepts clumsy.
 
If you’re asking, would 1+1=2 if God did not exist but the universe itself was existent (perhaps self-existent) and there were minds who could conceive of the concept, then yes, 1+1 would always equal 2 because the terms are self-referential.

If you’re asking, would 1+1=2 if God and concomitantly the universe and all minds did not exist, the answer would be “no”, as concepts cannot exist unless there are minds to think them.

Truth cannot be independent of God as all possible existents (be they matter, minds, concepts, etc.) are dependent on God. Without God there ain’t a thing!
 
wittgenstein said:
Response to post 8
There is a difference in the levels of nothingness! Empty space is more something then the space between two touching objects. Another thing I cannot wrap my mind around is total blindness. A totally blind person does not see black etc. I imagine it is like what we see when we see with our toes,less then nothing!
PS: The grammer of english (subject-predicate) makes expressing such concepts clumsy.
Click to expand...
Difference in levels of nothingness? Huh?

“Empty space” isn’t nothing - it’s space, it has dimension. Nothing is…nothing: no space, no time, no possible physical conception. As we can see empty space that proves it is not nothing.
 
Continuation of post 11
My curiosity is insatiable! I cannot help wondering what it would be like to have none of the 5 senses! I once experienced a sensory deprivation tank. However, I did not experience nothing. I experienced darkness etc.
 
Response to post 13
As I said the subject-predicate requirement of english makes expressing such concepts clumsy.
 
Response to 12
OK. Suppose absolutely nothing exists and what you wrote implies that even logic would not exist then. Since even logic would not exist, if something came from nothing that would not violate any logical laws!
 
Response to post 13
Suppose that there is only empty space. Nothing can move because nothing exists. Therefore time does not exist! Can anything exist if it does not even exist for a fraction of a nano-second?
 
wittgenstein said:
Response to 12
OK. Suppose absolutely nothing exists and what you wrote implies that even logic would not exist then. Since even logic would not exist, if something came from nothing that would not violate any logical laws!
Click to expand...
That’s not what I said. I said, that if God doesn’t exist, something else would have to be self-existent or always existing, and there would need to be minds to conceive of logical laws. Logic isn’t a self-existing, non-material entity but a system of necessary and self-referential concepts that exists in minds.

“Something coming from nothing” doesn’t violate a logical law, but a metaphysical one in understanding what “nothing” is.
 
wittgenstein said:
Response to post 13
Suppose that there is only empty space. Nothing can move because nothing exists. Therefore time does not exist! Can anything exist if it does not even exist for a fraction of a nano-second?
Click to expand...
A couple of points.

Empty space doesn’t mean “nothing”, there is still extension in space. If there is empty space then extension exists. If “nothing” exists (notice it’s a contradiction!) then there wouldn’t even be empty space.

As for time not existing, I guess that depends on how you define “time”. It’s quite tricky!
 
jonathan_hili said:
A couple of points.

Empty space doesn’t mean “nothing”, there is still extension in space. If there is empty space then extension exists. If “nothing” exists (notice it’s a contradiction!) then there wouldn’t even be empty space.

As for time not existing, I guess that depends on how you define “time”. It’s quite tricky!
Click to expand...
I once heard that “time” was the measurement of change. In that context, if there was nothing then nothing could change and there would be no time

I’m sure there are other definitions as you said.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top