Hmm - a spinoff-question form the omniscent question:

[Schadenfreude]

Original Thread, btw.

Is it possible to be both omniscent and omnipotent?

Because if you're omniscent = all-knowing

And omniscent = all-powerful

If it is said that one if omniscent, it means that there's some kind of inevitability to the future ahead, including the one who is omniscent (this is usually the fatalistic position taken by Christians/other monotheists). So if you're omniscent, you know of your own future. And there's nothing you could do to stop that, potentially.

Well, let's just say that "Chris" is omnipotent. Because he is omnipotent, he can will any occurances to happen - but at the same time, he has to follow the chain of events accordingly for it to happen in the first place.

If Chris is also omniscent, he knows what he will "will" into being and whatnot, so in effect, in knowing what he will do, he cannot change the inevitable future . . . because being omnipotent is in itself a factor to the predetermined/determined future. And in being chained to an inevitability, Chris is in fact non-omnipotent (because he knows what he will do, and even if he chaged the future to prove himself wrong, he knew he'd change the future).

Or am I wrong?

 

[StageLeft]

I'm just going to say that somebody who is omnipotent could surely be omniscient. "I can do anything! And thus now I will decide that I shall know everything!"

 

[Spoooon]

To me omniscient is really knowing all that is and all that can. And being omnipotent, I decide to do something and immediately know the consequences through to the end of time.

 

[Schadenfreude]

Originally posted by: Spoooon
To me omniscient is really knowing all that is and all that can. And being omnipotent, I decide to do something and immediately know the consequences through to the end of time.

So in being omnipotent, you don't really "know everything", you only know "what might happen"?

 

[Spoooon]

Originally posted by: Jehovah

Originally posted by: Spoooon
To me omniscient is really knowing all that is and all that can. And being omnipotent, I decide to do something and immediately know the consequences through to the end of time.

So in being omnipotent, you don't really "know everything", you only know "what might happen"?

Well, I would think that omniscience would come with omnipotence. You're hardly all powerful without being all knowing.

 

[Zenmervolt]

Originally posted by: Jehovah

Originally posted by: Spoooon
To me omniscient is really knowing all that is and all that can. And being omnipotent, I decide to do something and immediately know the consequences through to the end of time.

So in being omnipotent, you don't really "know everything", you only know "what might happen"?

No, you know what will happen for any given action you could possibly take. You can see every branch of the possability tree. The two are not exclusive.

ZV

 

[godspeedx]

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt

Originally posted by: Jehovah

Originally posted by: Spoooon
To me omniscient is really knowing all that is and all that can. And being omnipotent, I decide to do something and immediately know the consequences through to the end of time.

So in being omnipotent, you don't really "know everything", you only know "what might happen"?

No, you know what will happen for any given action you could possibly take. You can see every branch of the possability tree. The two are not exclusive.

ZV

It's not specifically for you. (It doesn't mean that you will only know consequences for actions you take.) Being omniscient means that you are all knowing of the past, present, and future. You know what has happened, what is happening, and what will happen.

Omnipotence is simply the power to do anything.



Omniscience does not invovle any actions on part of the omniscient one.

 

[Hanpan]

Remember that if you are truly omipotent the arrow of time does not effect you. That is to say, the idea of things happening in the future is non-sensical.

 

[Zenmervolt]

Originally posted by: Hanpan
Remember that if you are truly omipotent the arrow of time does not effect you. That is to say, the idea of things happening in the future is non-sensical.

Very good point.

ZV

 

[Schadenfreude]

So all this boils down to the absolute definition of both "omniscent" and "omnipotent" -

Well, I would think that omniscience would come with omnipotence. You're hardly all powerful without being all knowing.

No, you know what will happen for any given action you could possibly take. You can see every branch of the possability tree. The two are not exclusive.

Why do you say that? Why can't they be all-exclusive?

It's not specifically for you. (It doesn't mean that you will only know consequences for actions you take.) Being omniscient means that you are all knowing of the past, present, and future. You know what has happened, what is happening, and what will happen.

Omnipotence is simply the power to do anything.

Omniscience does not invovle any actions on part of the omniscient one.

This is exactly the definitions I was thinking of. With some of the points being raised, I understand how you can say that omnipotence has to entail omniscence, but does omniscence have to entail omnipotence? I am leaning towards a "no".

 

[Schadenfreude]

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt

Originally posted by: Hanpan
Remember that if you are truly omipotent the arrow of time does not effect you. That is to say, the idea of things happening in the future is non-sensical.

Very good point.

ZV

D'oh! I didn't figure this into account . . ..

 

[lowfatbaconboy]

i don't think they are exclusive......

 

[Schadenfreude]

Originally posted by: lowfatbaconboy
i don't think they are exclusive......

Why? You can say a lot of things, but people won't believe you unless you give a valid reason for it. Please, write an essay . . . hehe, I'm kidding, but why do you not think they're not exclusive?