| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Moloth
Coin Operated Boy
Joined: 27 Aug 2003
Posts: 21268
Local time: 1:49 AM
Location: Warner Robins, GA
|
 Posted: Mon May 05, 2008 3:25 pm Post subject: |
  |
|
"The Unstoppable Force vs. The Unmovable Object"dilemma is a false one.
the existence of ONE of those PRECLUDES the existence of the other. If something is "Unstoppable", it means, by definition, that nothing can stop it. If something is "Unmovable", it means, by definition, that nothing can move it.
Omnipotence vs. Reality is a similar false dilemma. Either something is omni-max or there is such thing as reality.
and, since we have evidence that reality exists, 'omnipotence' must be the one that does not exist.
QED.
_________________
-=The Believer is Happy; the Skeptic is Wise=-
www.Moloth.com
www.twitter.com/Moloth
www.MySpace.com/Moloth
www.last.fm/user/moloth
Last edited by Moloth on Tue Feb 30, 2026 13:61 am; edited 426 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
|
megamanXplosion
Visitor
Joined: 04 May 2008
Posts: 12
Local time: 1:49 AM
|
| Posted: Wed May 07, 2008 1:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | the existence of ONE of those PRECLUDES the existence of the other. If something is "Unstoppable", it means, by definition, that nothing can stop it. If something is "Unmovable", it means, by definition, that nothing can move it. |
Not necessarily. The unstoppable force could have the ghostly quality of passing through obects. In that case, nothing would be able to stop it. The unmovable rock would also remain unmovable because the unstoppable force would go right through it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Philosophos
Do it
Joined: 01 Mar 2004
Posts: 9278
Local time: 2:49 AM
Location: Where Scum Are
|
| Posted: Wed May 07, 2008 1:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
| megamanXplosion wrote: | | Not necessarily. The unstoppable force could have the ghostly quality of passing through obects. In that case, nothing would be able to stop it. The unmovable rock would also remain unmovable because the unstoppable force would go right through it. |
Force in this context implies that it would actually move, Newton's laws assumed or not.
But you're right in that contradictions depend on the definitions employed.
_________________
The whores and politicians will shout 'save us'...
...and I'll whisper 'no'. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
josephpalazzo
Illusion Master
Joined: 30 Aug 2006
Posts: 7640
Local time: 1:49 AM
Location: D-brane
|
| Posted: Wed May 07, 2008 7:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Moloth wrote: | "The Unstoppable Force vs. The Unmovable Object"dilemma is a false one.
the existence of ONE of those PRECLUDES the existence of the other. If something is "Unstoppable", it means, by definition, that nothing can stop it. If something is "Unmovable", it means, by definition, that nothing can move it.
Omnipotence vs. Reality is a similar false dilemma. Either something is omni-max or there is such thing as reality.
and, since we have evidence that reality exists, 'omnipotence' must be the one that does not exist.
QED. |
In my imagination, I can make God do anything, including an unstoppable force and an unmovable object. I suggest you work on your imagination skills. I rest my case... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Moloth
Coin Operated Boy
Joined: 27 Aug 2003
Posts: 21268
Local time: 1:49 AM
Location: Warner Robins, GA
|
| Posted: Wed May 07, 2008 8:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
| megamanXplosion wrote: | | Quote: | | the existence of ONE of those PRECLUDES the existence of the other. If something is "Unstoppable", it means, by definition, that nothing can stop it. If something is "Unmovable", it means, by definition, that nothing can move it. |
Not necessarily. The unstoppable force could have the ghostly quality of passing through obects. In that case, nothing would be able to stop it. The unmovable rock would also remain unmovable because the unstoppable force would go right through it. |
"force" cannot be intangible.
In physics, a force is a push or pull that can cause an object with mass to accelerate.[1] Force has both magnitude and direction, making it a vector quantity. According to Newton's Second Law, an object will accelerate in proportion to the net force acting upon it and in inverse proportion to the object's mass. An equivalent formulation is that the net force on an object is equal to the rate of change of momentum it experiences.[2] Forces acting on three-dimensional objects may also cause them to rotate or deform, or result in a change in pressure. The tendency of a force to cause rotation about an axis is termed torque. Deformation and pressure are the result of stress forces within an object.[3][4]
force, by definition, is that which effects mass.
_________________
-=The Believer is Happy; the Skeptic is Wise=-
www.Moloth.com
www.twitter.com/Moloth
www.MySpace.com/Moloth
www.last.fm/user/moloth
Last edited by Moloth on Tue Feb 30, 2026 13:61 am; edited 426 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Raskolnikov
The Axe Murderer
Joined: 22 Oct 2007
Posts: 1709
Local time: 11:49 PM
Location: Las Vegas
|
| Posted: Wed May 07, 2008 4:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Moloth wrote: | | megamanXplosion wrote: | | Quote: | | the existence of ONE of those PRECLUDES the existence of the other. If something is "Unstoppable", it means, by definition, that nothing can stop it. If something is "Unmovable", it means, by definition, that nothing can move it. |
Not necessarily. The unstoppable force could have the ghostly quality of passing through obects. In that case, nothing would be able to stop it. The unmovable rock would also remain unmovable because the unstoppable force would go right through it. |
"force" cannot be intangible.
In physics, a force is a push or pull that can cause an object with mass to accelerate.[1] Force has both magnitude and direction, making it a vector quantity. According to Newton's Second Law, an object will accelerate in proportion to the net force acting upon it and in inverse proportion to the object's mass. An equivalent formulation is that the net force on an object is equal to the rate of change of momentum it experiences.[2] Forces acting on three-dimensional objects may also cause them to rotate or deform, or result in a change in pressure. The tendency of a force to cause rotation about an axis is termed torque. Deformation and pressure are the result of stress forces within an object.[3][4]
force, by definition, is that which effects mass. |
lol. A little knowledge of physics go a long way.
_________________
"Shake off all the fears of servile prejudices, underwhich weak minds are servilely crouched. Fix reason firmly in her seat and call on her tribunal for every fact, every opinion. Question with boldness even the existence of a God, for if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blindfolded fear."
-Thomas Jefferson
"The future is not set in stone. The future is what you make it. So make it a good one!"
-Dr. Emmett Brown |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Moloth
Coin Operated Boy
Joined: 27 Aug 2003
Posts: 21268
Local time: 1:49 AM
Location: Warner Robins, GA
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GodWarrior98
Royal Citizen
Joined: 22 Mar 2008
Posts: 397
Local time: 1:49 AM
|
| Posted: Sat May 10, 2008 2:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Moloth wrote: | | megamanXplosion wrote: | | Quote: | | the existence of ONE of those PRECLUDES the existence of the other. If something is "Unstoppable", it means, by definition, that nothing can stop it. If something is "Unmovable", it means, by definition, that nothing can move it. |
Not necessarily. The unstoppable force could have the ghostly quality of passing through obects. In that case, nothing would be able to stop it. The unmovable rock would also remain unmovable because the unstoppable force would go right through it. |
"force" cannot be intangible.
In physics, a force is a push or pull that can cause an object with mass to accelerate.[1] Force has both magnitude and direction, making it a vector quantity. According to Newton's Second Law, an object will accelerate in proportion to the net force acting upon it and in inverse proportion to the object's mass. An equivalent formulation is that the net force on an object is equal to the rate of change of momentum it experiences.[2] Forces acting on three-dimensional objects may also cause them to rotate or deform, or result in a change in pressure. The tendency of a force to cause rotation about an axis is termed torque. Deformation and pressure are the result of stress forces within an object.[3][4]
force, by definition, is that which effects mass. |
In a very very abstract viewpoint, the conundrum is still possible.
Consider a universe with only one fundamental force (gravity), a very big rock, and a photon. The rock and photon are not moving with respect to each other. As soon as this universe comes into being, the rock produces a gravitational wave. This can be considered an unstoppable force, seeing as it won't cease at any point. However, when it comes across the photon, seeing as it is massless, nothing happens to it, and it remains an unmovable object.
As for the actual question, there are a few solutions to it that I find suitable.
God, being omnipotent, would have the ability to remove his omnipotence from himself at any time. He could also do this by any means. Creating the rock would be an example of this.
Or, God is omnipotent as far as things that are logically consistent. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
josephpalazzo
Illusion Master
Joined: 30 Aug 2006
Posts: 7640
Local time: 1:49 AM
Location: D-brane
|
| Posted: Sat May 10, 2008 6:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
| GodWarrior98 wrote: |
Consider a universe with only one fundamental force (gravity), a very big rock, and a photon. The rock and photon are not moving with respect to each other.
|
There is no such thing as a photon at rest, and the rock cannot move at the speed of light. That scenario is not a possible one... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Moloth
Coin Operated Boy
Joined: 27 Aug 2003
Posts: 21268
Local time: 1:49 AM
Location: Warner Robins, GA
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GodWarrior98
Royal Citizen
Joined: 22 Mar 2008
Posts: 397
Local time: 1:49 AM
|
| Posted: Sat May 10, 2008 10:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
| josephpalazzo wrote: | | GodWarrior98 wrote: |
Consider a universe with only one fundamental force (gravity), a very big rock, and a photon. The rock and photon are not moving with respect to each other.
|
There is no such thing as a photon at rest, and the rock cannot move at the speed of light. That scenario is not a possible one... |
Alright, change the fundamental force to electromagnetism. Have a moving rock and a non-moving and electrically neutral particle. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Raskolnikov
The Axe Murderer
Joined: 22 Oct 2007
Posts: 1709
Local time: 11:49 PM
Location: Las Vegas
|
| Posted: Sat May 10, 2008 10:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
| GodWarrior98 wrote: | As for the actual question, there are a few solutions to it that I find suitable.
God, being omnipotent, would have the ability to remove his omnipotence from himself at any time. He could also do this by any means. Creating the rock would be an example of this. |
So you admit he can't lift the rock.
| GodWarrior98 wrote: | | Or, God is omnipotent as far as things that are logically consistent. |
So God isn't omnipotent. Thanks.
edit: Here's the definition just for consistencies sake.
Omnipotent \Om*nip"o*tent\, a. [F., fr.L. omnipotens, -entis; omnis all + potens powerful, potent. See Potent.]
1. Able in every respect and for every work; unlimited in ability; all-powerful; almighty; as, the Being that can create worlds must be omnipotent.
_________________
"Shake off all the fears of servile prejudices, underwhich weak minds are servilely crouched. Fix reason firmly in her seat and call on her tribunal for every fact, every opinion. Question with boldness even the existence of a God, for if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blindfolded fear."
-Thomas Jefferson
"The future is not set in stone. The future is what you make it. So make it a good one!"
-Dr. Emmett Brown |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GodWarrior98
Royal Citizen
Joined: 22 Mar 2008
Posts: 397
Local time: 1:49 AM
|
| Posted: Sat May 10, 2008 10:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Raskolnikov wrote: | | GodWarrior98 wrote: | As for the actual question, there are a few solutions to it that I find suitable.
God, being omnipotent, would have the ability to remove his omnipotence from himself at any time. He could also do this by any means. Creating the rock would be an example of this. |
So you admit he can't lift the rock.
| GodWarrior98 wrote: | | Or, God is omnipotent as far as things that are logically consistent. |
So God isn't omnipotent. Thanks. |
Only because omnipotence is a logical impossibility. Of course, I could go the route of the fundamentalist and tell you that God doesn't even abide by logic. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Raskolnikov
The Axe Murderer
Joined: 22 Oct 2007
Posts: 1709
Local time: 11:49 PM
Location: Las Vegas
|
| Posted: Sat May 10, 2008 10:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
| GodWarrior98 wrote: | | Raskolnikov wrote: | | GodWarrior98 wrote: | As for the actual question, there are a few solutions to it that I find suitable.
God, being omnipotent, would have the ability to remove his omnipotence from himself at any time. He could also do this by any means. Creating the rock would be an example of this. |
So you admit he can't lift the rock.
| GodWarrior98 wrote: | | Or, God is omnipotent as far as things that are logically consistent. |
So God isn't omnipotent. Thanks. |
Only because omnipotence is a logical impossibility. Of course, I could go the route of the fundamentalist and tell you that God doesn't even abide by logic. |
But then you would be in the pickle of explaining the answer of the question.
_________________
"Shake off all the fears of servile prejudices, underwhich weak minds are servilely crouched. Fix reason firmly in her seat and call on her tribunal for every fact, every opinion. Question with boldness even the existence of a God, for if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blindfolded fear."
-Thomas Jefferson
"The future is not set in stone. The future is what you make it. So make it a good one!"
-Dr. Emmett Brown |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GodWarrior98
Royal Citizen
Joined: 22 Mar 2008
Posts: 397
Local time: 1:49 AM
|
| Posted: Sat May 10, 2008 10:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Raskolnikov wrote: | | GodWarrior98 wrote: | | Raskolnikov wrote: | | GodWarrior98 wrote: | As for the actual question, there are a few solutions to it that I find suitable.
God, being omnipotent, would have the ability to remove his omnipotence from himself at any time. He could also do this by any means. Creating the rock would be an example of this. |
So you admit he can't lift the rock.
| GodWarrior98 wrote: | | Or, God is omnipotent as far as things that are logically consistent. |
So God isn't omnipotent. Thanks. |
Only because omnipotence is a logical impossibility. Of course, I could go the route of the fundamentalist and tell you that God doesn't even abide by logic. |
But then you would be in the pickle of explaining the answer of the question. |
That's mostly why I didn't say that, because it degenerates into things that are less and less logical. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
Live Video and Chat Room
Freethought Videos
FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Register
