Philosophy Now Forum

THE DOUBLE DICHOTOMY PROOF OF GOD

1) A metaphysical dichotomy between the set of all possible all inclusive states of existence and no states of existence proves that no states of existence cannot be the case, because our universe is real.

2) A metaphysical dichotomy between the set of all possible all inclusive states of existence that can become real and the set of all possible all inclusive states of existence that cannot become real being those possible all inclusive states of existence that contain two logically possible but contradictory states proves that the set of all possible all inclusive states of existence that cannot become real cannot be the case, because our universe is real.

3) Because our universe had a beginning and does not need to be real, and because something must be real without our universe being real due to the fact that no states of existence cannot be real, then there must be something real without our universe being real proving that all inclusive states of existence that can become real must be possible in reality.

4) Because the set of all possible all inclusive states of existence that can become real is infinite because one can imagine any given universe with the addition of just one more thing ad infinitum, then there cannot be a probability for any given universe because the set is infinite.

5) But because the universe is real, then there must be something real which determines what becomes real among the infinite set of all possible all inclusive states of existence where said determination is not based on probability or random chance.

6) Because something can be real and our universe not be real, then there must be a power to create the real such as our universe, and as there is a power to create the real, then there must be a power to determine what is real based on an order of preference.

7) Because the set of all possible all inclusive states of existence that can become real is not inherently ordered, and because it is possible to determine based on preference which possible all inclusive states of existence come into reality, then there must be a real eternal constraint that determines through will and intellect to allow any or all of these possible all inclusive states of existence to become real.

8] Because the actualization of any or all possible all inclusive states of existence that can become real requires the constraint to actualize them, then the constraint cannot be made and therefore must be infinite pure act without moving parts.

9) Said constraint must have power over all possible all inclusive states of existence that can become real being omnipotent and omnipresent.

10) Said constraint must have knowledge of all possible all inclusive states of existence that can become real being omniscient.

11) Because the mind of the constraint is omnipresent and hence within all of us, our minds are contained within the mind of the constraint which calls all of us to be Sons of the constraint.

12) Hence, a single being exists who is eternal, omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent, is not made, and has a will and intellect and we call this being God.

John J. Bannan wrote:A NEW PROOF OF GOD

1) A metaphysical dichotomy between the set of all possible states of existence and no states of existence proves that the set of all possible states of existence happens to be the case...

No it doesn't. It's a false dichotomy; the only certainty is that there is at least one state of existence.

@uwot

A metaphysical dichotomy is not a statement of reality. It can't be falsified by reality.

Rather, I think your beef is with #2.

However, then let me ask you this - can a multiverse be real?

John J. Bannan wrote:@uwot

A metaphysical dichotomy is not a statement of reality. It can't be falsified by reality.

I see. So we must choose between something for which there is no conceivable evidence, and something else for which there is no conceivable evidence.

John J. Bannan wrote:Rather, I think your beef is with #2.

If we ever get there...

John J. Bannan wrote:However, then let me ask you this - can a multiverse be real?

It rather depends open what you mean by multiverse: Could there be more than one absolutely everything? No. Could the visible universe be part of a larger structure? Yes. Is that structure therefore infinite? (I may be wrong, but in anticipation.) No.

Bannan: A metaphysical dichotomy ... proves that the set of all possible states of existence happens to be the case.
Bannan: A metaphysical dichotomy is not a statement of reality.

These two ideas seem to me to contradict each other. I take it that by "the case" you mean "reality". How then can a statement which is not about reality come to entail a statement which is about reality?

OP ..this isn't proof, it's merely wishful thinking, no more ..no less.

1) A metaphysical dichotomy between the set of all possible states of existence and no states of existence proves that the set of all possible states of existence happens to be the case, which includes a constraint on all possible states of existence because said constraint is logically possible.

It's contradictory to say that "all states of possible existence" occur but then say there are constraints on which states occur. If you are limiting yourself to a dichotomy then either you have them all or you do not!

@uwot

If you believe a multiverse is possible, then you should understand my proof.

@mickthinks

No. A metaphysical dichotomy is not about reality. It is a metaphysical proof. The constraint is about reality. Read #2.

@HexHammer. It is a proof. Read #2. Do you believe a multiverse is possible?

John J. Bannan wrote:@uwot

If you believe a multiverse is possible, then you should understand my proof.

Which version of multiverse do I need to believe possible to understand your proof? Why does follow that I therefore should?

@uwot

It doesn't matter which version. The point is that a multiverse would mean that in actuality more than one state of existence is real. That supports my metaphysical dichotomy.

John J. Bannan wrote:@HexHammer. It is a proof. Read #2. Do you believe a multiverse is possible?

That is still not a proof, but still wishful thinking.

John J. Bannan wrote:A NEW PROOF OF GOD

1) A metaphysical dichotomy between the set of all possible states of existence and no states of existence proves that the set of all possible states of existence happens to be the case, which includes a constraint on all possible states of existence because said constraint is logically possible.

2) Because reality does not contain all possible states of existence, then there must be a real eternal constraint on all possible states of existence that permits any or all possible states of existence to actualize into reality if the constraint allows it.

3) Because the actualization of any or all possible states of existence requires the constraint to actualize, then the constraint cannot be made.

4) Said constraint must have power over all states of existence being omnipotent and omnipresent.

5) Said constraint must have knowledge of all states of existence being omniscient.

6) Because the mind of the constraint is omnipresent and hence within all of us, our minds are contained within the mind of the constraint which calls all of us to be Sons of God.

7) Hence, a single being exists who is unmade, eternal, omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent and we call this being God.

Number 1. appears to a statement in terms of a set of all sets that do no contain themselves. On that basis you might have to think how this impacts on the rest.

John J. Bannan wrote:@uwot

It doesn't matter which version. The point is that a multiverse would mean that in actuality more than one state of existence is real. That supports my metaphysical dichotomy.

For the reason mickthinks has already given, no it doesn't.
Anyway; you think my beef might be with #2:

John J. Bannan wrote:2) Because reality does not contain all possible states of existence,

What is your evidence for this?