• MotoAsh@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    I mean… Not really. Paradoxes don’t actually exist. Causality itself would fail to work if literally inconsistent things could be magically made consistent. It’s fundamentally not how the universe works. Literally. What you ask for could exist, but not in a universe that behaves like ours. It is fundamentally incompatible with what is observed.

    Yes, completely and fundamentally incompatible. Even if God could start up a billion universes with a billion rules … ours doesn’t work like that. It’s like a game character saying, “yea well the devs could totally make this RPG a FPS game!”

    Is the possibility true? Yes. Though for no reason the game character will ever comprehend nor be able to ever observe. It is fundamentally a pointless point that adds no new information to the equation.

    • ricecake@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      We’re discussing logical consequences of a thing, not if the thing is possible in the first place.
      You don’t have to talk logical consistency to rule out “all knowing and all powerful” if you’re just looking at how things work in reality.
      In reality, you can’t be all powerful or all knowing. Done, end of story. It’s impossible on the face of it.

      In the hypothetical where something can be all powerful, then the power to do whatever, even in a universe that behaves like ours does, is consistent.
      The power to do anything includes the absurd, inconsistent, and contradictory.

      • MotoAsh@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        Logic requires cause and effect. If you break cause and effect, logic means nothing.

        If you keep logic, then again: Paradoxes don’t actually exist. At the end of the day, something is true or it’s not. If you’re dealing with something both true and not true, you are literally and quite directly dealing with something unresolved. We fundamentally do not observe unresolved things.

        It is conceptually, definitionally, not compatible with observed reality. “Observed reality” literally cannot reference such things. The question itself is nothing but a thought experiment that far too many people fail to execute.