UnderGround Forums
 

PhilosophyGround >> What if God was one of us...


4/18/07 10:28 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Giorgos
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 18-Apr-07
Member Since: 05/08/2006
Posts: 1679
 
and you got to ask him a single (philosophical) question? What would you ask?
4/18/07 12:29 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Giorgos
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 18-Apr-07
Member Since: 05/08/2006
Posts: 1680
hmmm, now that I think about this, I shouldn't have said God. Cause having that in front of you already answers a lot of philosophical questions :P Ok, how about it is some sort of an infallible super philosophy computer that can only answer one question and then burn down or something. lol
4/18/07 1:59 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Subadie
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 18-Apr-07
Member Since: 10/09/2004
Posts: 768
What would happen if you asked an unanswerable question to a computer that infallably gives the correct answer ?
4/18/07 5:15 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Subadie
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 18-Apr-07
Member Since: 10/09/2004
Posts: 769
no, thats not an answer but rather a refusal to answer
4/18/07 5:24 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Giorgos
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 18-Apr-07
Member Since: 05/08/2006
Posts: 1681
for example? "can an all powerful being create a stone that is so heavy that he can't lift?" this type of questions? what do u have in mind?
4/18/07 9:12 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Subadie
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 18-Apr-07 09:19 PM
Member Since: 10/09/2004
Posts: 770
Oh ? Say you are a two dimensional being. Running around horizontally but having no concept of up or down. If you ask an infallible super computer to describe this word you heard: "up" in terms you understand, it will not be able to give you an answer you can understand. This is unanswerable given the context of your limited awareness. However, it is not a priori unanswerable. Its too bad I dont have a blue name, otherwise I'd be able to bold and italicize too. Or to answer the initial question - why bother.
4/19/07 4:46 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Subadie
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 19-Apr-07
Member Since: 10/09/2004
Posts: 771
if it cannot be understood it is perfectly legitimate to call it unanswerable from the perspective of the questioner
4/19/07 10:06 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Giorgos
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 19-Apr-07
Member Since: 05/08/2006
Posts: 1684
^knee is correct here. analytically correct, I don't see what the problem is either. Just because I happen to be color blind and that computer tells me the sky is blue, I cannot infer that it is an unanswerable question just by virtue of me not grasping it or not being able to.
4/19/07 5:24 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Subadie
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 19-Apr-07
Member Since: 10/09/2004
Posts: 772
It is more than one simply being unable to grasp. It would be logically impossible for a word to exist in any language available to a two dimensional being which could explain the meaning of the word "up." Therefore an answer him/her/itself COULD NOT explain it. Since it is logically impossible to explain "up" to shorty, it is unanswerable in the legitimate sense of the word. The fact that a three dimensional being can explain it to another three dimensional being makes it not a priori unanswerable.
4/20/07 2:23 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
DyingBreed
16 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 20-Apr-07
Member Since: 01/18/2003
Posts: 13184
i would ask him "why"
4/20/07 4:53 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Giorgos
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 20-Apr-07 04:57 PM
Member Since: 05/08/2006
Posts: 1690
ok, here's one:) "dear Mr. Computer, could you give me the ordered pair {a,b}, 'a' being the best possible philosophical question that could be asked and 'b' being its answer?"
4/20/07 7:04 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
FudoMyoo
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 20-Apr-07
Member Since: 01/01/2001
Posts: 13525
It´s from the philosophical supercomputers perfect POV of course! ;-)
4/21/07 2:41 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
DyingBreed
16 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 21-Apr-07
Member Since: 01/18/2003
Posts: 13186
"Why what?" Why, if he knows everything, knowing we would fall from him, did he create us anyway
5/3/07 4:42 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Giorgos
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 03-May-07 06:55 PM
Member Since: 05/08/2006
Posts: 1730
"Interesting... Do you really think the computer can answer a subjective question?" hmmm...i don't think this would be a problem, there are some problems with my question, but i don't think this is one of them. I mean, think of Eucledes (lol, not Archimedes as I originally said). paraphrasing: "Give me one firm point... and I can make the whole world rotate around it". Now, I guess with my question, the computer would ultimately need to give me some sort of point that looks like what Eucledes was looking for. If that is possible, and if such a point exists, then I would get my answer and it would indeed be an objective one I guess; I could be wrong though. A problem, however, that my question probably has, is whether it is really one question. Or, another problem is that the answer could be a logical loop of the sort: "well, 'a' is the question you have just asked and 'b' is the answer that I have just given you". :)
5/3/07 6:45 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Giorgos
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 03-May-07
Member Since: 05/08/2006
Posts: 1732
so, I guess this takes us into a meta-philosophical discussion then... "unless there is some underlying reality which the computer has the privilege of knowing." exactly, I am assuming this much. That is, the computer KNOWS what philosophy is good for, i.e. objectively good for, and can, thus, give me the appropriate answer. But your point is valid in that philosophy covers many aspects of the so called "reality". I would then assume that the answer I am expecting has some sort of an intrinsic utilitarian value. In other words, the computer will know, that had I asked this question, its answer would be such that it would have created the best possible of all worlds, granted what philosophy is good for. Now, I couldn't know before-hand whether that question would be an ethical one, a theoretical physics question (e.g. how does relativity and quantum theories relate?) or what have you. That is the super computer's job :)
6/28/07 10:28 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Gorgeous
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 28-Jun-07
Member Since: 06/14/2002
Posts: 9570
...then God wouldn't be a god as the definition of divine is not to be human.
6/28/07 10:38 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Gorgeous
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 28-Jun-07
Member Since: 06/14/2002
Posts: 9576
I would ask how could people think for a moment that you are not also completely divine?

Reply Post

You must log in to post a reply. Click here to login.