Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

1 Bump

Let's take a more serious look at this concept

The "poop" aspect is a bit distracting in that other question, so I want to get to the issue I was bringing up in it:

Can a being be "all knowing" without experiencing things directly? For example - we can see a dog get a shot. We can watch a slew of medical monitoring devices hooked up to the dog while it gets a shot, and we can listen to the noises the dog makes while it gets the shot. But can we truly know what the dog feels when it's getting the shot?

If a deity has not experienced something, how can it know what it feels like? If it is all knowing, how can it know the feeling of learning something new? It already knows it all, there is no way it can experience new knowledge.

But then there's the paradox - if something is incapable of knowing something, it cannot be all knowing.

Answer Question
 
NotPanicking

Asked by NotPanicking at 7:57 PM on Oct. 3, 2012 in Religion & Beliefs

Level 50 (406,223 Credits)
Answers (17)
  • Or perhaps "all knowing" was just hyperbolic language for "wise" ;)
    bandgeek521

    Answer by bandgeek521 at 8:22 PM on Oct. 3, 2012

  • Well seeing as god doesn't exist I suppose he can be anything anyone wants him to be. Such as the paradox of my invisible purple polka dotted elephant. It can be both invisible and purple because I imagine it to be so. The same can be said for "god"
    KristiS11384

    Answer by KristiS11384 at 8:44 PM on Oct. 3, 2012

  • NP, I really enjoy your questions (and answers) but you put a lot of thought into them. My response to this one us I think you are applying human methods and limitations to gaining knowledge to a diety that is not human. Also, can you make knowledge and experience synonomous here?Can an all knowing diety have knowledge of something but not the actual feelings of experience? Im not sure. Will have to think on this some more.....
    Nimue930

    Answer by Nimue930 at 8:23 PM on Oct. 3, 2012

  • I am still thinking that just because we choose the terms, it doesnt necessarily make them applicable to God. When does a diety get defined by something less than? Do we define and teach animals or do they define us?

    Not trying to be stubborn..... reallythinking this thru.....
    Nimue930

    Answer by Nimue930 at 9:45 PM on Oct. 3, 2012

  • Sorry for typos...mobile without my glasses!
    Nimue930

    Answer by Nimue930 at 8:24 PM on Oct. 3, 2012

  • NP, choosing them, and discussing them, furthers our knowledge... but there has to come a point where you (I) say "this is as good as Ive got". I can only define God within my limited human knowledge parameters, and that isn't good enough. Im trying to describe something that is outside the limits of my descriptors. I am, in fact, limiting a diety to fit within the scope of my understanding, when the very nature of His existence is that He is limitless.
    Nimue930

    Answer by Nimue930 at 3:12 PM on Oct. 4, 2012

  • Does a deity "feel"? Does a deity "think"? How does it process all this "knowing" it supposedly has?
    sorry to answer with more questions.
    sahmamax2

    Answer by sahmamax2 at 6:34 PM on Oct. 4, 2012

  • Ah... this is why I believe what I currently do. Because I cannot grasp the concept that a god is all-knowing without having experienced everything.

    My current beliefs state that the Creator created and became the Universe in order to experience every single thing. It was not enough for It to simply *know* everything, It had to become everything in the Universe in order to gain the experience in addition to the knowledge. Of course I cannot prove any of the things I just claimed, but then again I am not claiming that the Creator is currenly all-knowing, just that it was a being far greater than we are.
    anime_mom619

    Answer by anime_mom619 at 10:07 PM on Oct. 6, 2012

  • I think you are applying human methods and limitations to gaining knowledge to a diety that is not human.

    But it's humans who chose the terms with which to define the being. There are basic rules of philosophy, one of the main ones being you cannot use the impossible. The question about can god create a rock so big he cannot move it is not a rational question, because it would require an object that can exist in 2 states at the same time - a rock he can create and a rock he cannot move.

    To make the claim that something is "all knowing", they must be able to know everything within the laws of the real world. That would include experiencing something.
    NotPanicking

    Comment by NotPanicking (original poster) at 8:28 PM on Oct. 3, 2012

  • I am still thinking that just because we choose the terms, it doesnt necessarily make them applicable to God.

    Then what's the point of choosing them at all?
    NotPanicking

    Comment by NotPanicking (original poster) at 10:50 PM on Oct. 3, 2012

Join CafeMom now to contribute your answer and become part of our community. It's free and takes just a minute.