Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I close my eyes and see a flock of birds. The vision lasts a second or perhaps less; I don’t know how many birds I saw. Were they a definite or an indefinite number? This problem involves the question of the existence of God. If God exists, the number is definite, because how many birds I saw is known to God. If God does not exist, the number is indefinite, because nobody was able to take count. In this case, I saw fewer than ten birds (let’s say) and more than one; but I did not see nine, eight, seven, six, five, four, three, or two birds. I saw a number between ten and one, but not nine, eight, seven, six, five, etc. That number, as a whole number, is inconceivable. Therefore, God exists.

What's his cell phone number?

I doubt this thread will develop well but I shall leave it unlocked for the moment.

That's a really cool piece there. Did you come up with it yourself?

So your logic is that because you did not have time to count some birds, God exists? I've heard some weak arguments for the existence of a supreme deity in my time, but that one is pretty awful.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
I doubt this thread will develop well but I shall leave it unlocked for the moment.

Why would you lock this thread? What rule does it violate?

 Medium of Death wrote:
That's a really cool piece there. Did you come up with it yourself?

I thought it up while wandering through a labyrinth, and quickly scribbled it down in the margin of a copy of the Burton translation of 1001 Nights I happened to have on me.

This should be fun.

 hughpower wrote:
I thought it up while wandering through a labyrinth, and quickly scribbled it down in the margin of a copy of the Burton translation of 1001 Nights I happened to have on me.

I'm starting to think we need to party, man. Wandering through labyrinths, philosophizing about birds while fanciful thoughts of magic carpet rides dance through our heads--with the right kind of munchies that sounds like an epic day!

Speaking of birds, what is the fastest bird on the planet?

He should be arriving shortly.

If a forest in Brazil falls to loggers, can you hear the trees scream?

The number of birds you saw is only known to God if you believe in an omnipotent, omnipresent, and omniprescient deity ala the Judeo-Christian concept of one. This is not definite, and is in and of itself seemingly unknowable, ergo the key (and very logically flawed) element of your argument is invalid based on an assumption that cannot (or at least should not) be made in any academic/intellectual discussion on God.

Beyond that, theres a bit of a math issue inherent to your argument, as you saw a whole number between 1 and 10 which is NOT itself a whole number/integer between 1 and 10, which violates a pretty fundamental mathematical law. The number would have to be conceivable by virtue of the fact that it is a whole number integer between 1 and 10 (and thus conceivable by almost anyone with an average intelligence and most people with a below average one), whether or not it is PERCEIVABLE is a different story, as you don't know how many birds you saw, but that is in and of itself a function of your mental acuity and ability to process information, not a function of whether or not God exists.

Beyond that, as the vision of birds was a function of your mind, the number of birds witnessed is IN FACT known to you by virtue of the fact that mental images produced by the mind are not 'randomly generated', while your conscious mind may not be aware of the number of birds in the image, some element of the subconscious is aware of the exact number, or was aware of the exact number at the time said vision was produced.

 hughpower wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
I doubt this thread will develop well but I shall leave it unlocked for the moment.

Why would you lock this thread? What rule does it violate?

...

Threads don't violate rules. Users violate rules. In this case the amount of gak the thread is likely to attract might justify locking it immediately but I decided to leave it open in the as it turns out naive hope that people would engage in a constructive debate on the issue.

Dude, when it thunders It's god face-palming at this stupid crap.

Jehovah seriously doesn't give a crap about numbers. The human race had to interbreed for generations to get to our current pinnacle.

I do not get the logical leap from (a) the fact that you couldn't quantify how many birds you saw in your imagination, and (b) God exists.

The unknowability of the # of birds in your mind's eye is completely compatible with (a) 1 or more gods, or (b) no gods.

Which god are we talking about by the way? VIshnu? Odin? Nurgle?

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 hughpower wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
I doubt this thread will develop well but I shall leave it unlocked for the moment.

Why would you lock this thread? What rule does it violate?

...

Threads don't violate rules. Users violate rules. In this case the amount of gak the thread is likely to attract might justify locking it immediately but I decided to leave it open in the as it turns out naive hope that people would engage in a constructive debate on the issue.

I think ChaosOmega's comment was very constructive and insightful, and evidence that your lack of faith in the Dakka community and the potential of this thread is unjustified.

 Wilytank wrote:
Which god are we talking about by the way? VIshnu? Odin? Nurgle?

As ChaosOmega pointed out, an omniscient god is necessary, e.g. Jehovah, but not Ninsun.

I wasn't replying to Chaos0xomega.

<----- Why does it rain?

Pa: God is crying because you're a bad child.

 jasper76 wrote:
I do not get the logical leap from (a) the fact that you couldn't quantify how many birds you saw in your imagination, and (b) God exists.

The unknowability of the # of birds in your mind's eye is completely compatible with (a) 1 or more gods, or (b) no gods.

Its taken from Borges Proof of the Existence of God (the OP's post is technically plagiarism in that regards as it seems he copy/pasted it verbatim without crediting the source), as I've understood it, the idea is similar to like the Uncertainty Principal or something. The idea is that there are no indefinite numbers (which is false), so if you do not know the quantity of birds, then some other entity MUST know the quantity of birds, ergo God must exist in order to provide that the number of birds is definite.

As ChaosOmega pointed out, an omniscient god is necessary, e.g. Jehovah, but not Ninsun.

But therein lies a problem, the idea of an omniscient God is a relatively recent one in human history, and discounts the conceptualizations of God's which predate that development, and thus creates an issue in which a large number of faiths, both past and present, are essentially invalidated, or rather, this 'proof of God' only works if you share the frame of reference of one who believes in an omniscient God. Given that the nature of God and whether or not he (or she) is omniscient is something that is presently uncertain, the entire proof basically falls apart at its assumptions, invalidating any conclusions drawn from it.

 hughpower wrote:

 Wilytank wrote:
Which god are we talking about by the way? VIshnu? Odin? Nurgle?

As ChaosOmega pointed out, an omniscient god is necessary, e.g. Jehovah, but not Ninsun.

Why not Odin? He sacrificed one of his eyes to gain knowledge of the past, present, and future. That's pretty omniscient if you ask me. Besides, he's got a more impressive beard than Jehovah and better songs have been written about him. I think I know which one I'd prefer.

BTW, those birds you saw, they were probably ravens and Odin's two ravens were among them.

This is why we can't have nice discussions here. To many people can't respect other people.

I don't think humans can ever know. Personally, I think if there were a supreme creator that were interested in interacting with humanity, He or She would have already done so unambiguously.

I think religion in general is just a way that the psyche of humans try to make sense of the experiences we have. Why would such a creator, in omnipotence, even care what comparative ants like us think, or feel, or do?

I think all we have is us, and that we should try to take better care of each other because it's the right thing to do, not because we fear a spanking from across time.

 Wilytank wrote:

 hughpower wrote:

 Wilytank wrote:
Which god are we talking about by the way? VIshnu? Odin? Nurgle?

As ChaosOmega pointed out, an omniscient god is necessary, e.g. Jehovah, but not Ninsun.

Why not Odin? He sacrificed one of his eyes to gain knowledge of the past, present, and future. That's pretty omniscient if you ask me. Besides, he's got a more impressive beard than Jehovah and better songs have been written about him. I think I know which one I'd prefer.

BTW, those birds you saw, they were probably ravens and Odin's two ravens were among them.

Odin knows many things about the past and future- but he doesn't know everything. Otherwise he wouldn't need Hugin and Munin to keep an eye on things.

To the OP- you did know the number of those birds, but the noodly appendage of the FSM moved in and altered your perception as He does with all attempts to prove or disprove His existence. None may know the truth of His existence until they are frolicking in the bottomless beer fountains of His kingdom.

 hughpower wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
I doubt this thread will develop well but I shall leave it unlocked for the moment.

Why would you lock this thread? What rule does it violate?

It violates the rule of assumption. Its a religious thread so the assumption is one cant discuss it like adults. Most religion threads do actually end well, though there are some God haters here that don't know how to let go and will never offer a respectful opinion no matter how approached.
Meanwhile please try to ignore the peanut gallery responses you will get, so it took some stones to post this:

 hughpower wrote:
I close my eyes and see a flock of birds. The vision lasts a second or perhaps less; I don’t know how many birds I saw. Were they a definite or an indefinite number? This problem involves the question of the existence of God. If God exists, the number is definite, because how many birds I saw is known to God. If God does not exist, the number is indefinite, because nobody was able to take count. In this case, I saw fewer than ten birds (let’s say) and more than one; but I did not see nine, eight, seven, six, five, four, three, or two birds. I saw a number between ten and one, but not nine, eight, seven, six, five, etc. That number, as a whole number, is inconceivable. Therefore, God exists.

This is not a great epiphany, but it could well be that the Holy Spirit was talking to you. I am assuming here you are talking about the western omniscient God from context.
Nevertheless you saw an indefinite number of birds because it was your vision, whether God could tell you how many birds you saw is not relevant to that point.
However the general message that beyond your uncertainty lies a larger certainty might have been the real teaching, after all it would apply to anything, not just a flock of birds.
Your experience does fit in with the way the Holy Spirit works, it has the right feel. Have you had this before; it can be quite a profound experience to hear God, and I am prepared to believe you did.

Two lessons:
First remember that the gifts of prophesy and the gift of interpretation are often two separate gifts. What you heard was not prophesy, and anyone can be enabled to interpret a personal message, but often it makes more sense when shared and interpreted. Perhaps you were meant to post this on Dakka.

Second, a single interpretation is not necessarily correct, weigh it up in your own heart and feel free to call for a second opinion, this is not considered weak faithed, dismissing a vision or interpretation without a second confirmation is normal theology, and dependent on how you interpret the relevant scripture a commandment.
This is because the mind that interpret or receives visions is a human mind with a human imagination. You will find if you network with other people who hear God that they/you will approach each other with confirmations, often unbidden. I remember instances of getting the same information from three or four people in as many different ways, it's generally a sign that the source is genuinely of God. Though if you don't trust the multiple sources, don't buy even that, some 'believers' are out to con you, but if you are spiritually alert you will be able to sniff them out over time. It's easy to spot a fake amongst a bunch of people with the charismata.

I closed my eyes and saw feth all. God is dead.

Also, do you need more shrooms?

$$$ = Primary
Everything else secondary

 djones520 wrote:
This is why we can't have nice discussions here. To many people can't respect other people.

screw you too chair force




As to the OP, I think I'm with Chaos here... the ideas really fall apart the more you look at them, and the more you actually think about them... Saying that a God must exist because there is a definite number of something makes about as much sense to me as saying, "I heard thunder, ergo, Thor is real"

It's been pointed out that there are other things at work here (most of which are not my area of expertise), and that these other forces at work do not prove, nor disprove the existence of a deity.

1. Our understanding of God is a being than which no greater can be conceived.
2. The idea of God exists in the mind.
3. A being that exists both in the mind and in reality is greater than a being that exists only in the mind.
4. If God only exists in the mind, then we can conceive of a greater being—that which exists in reality.
5. We cannot imagine something that is greater than God.
6. Therefore, God exists.

Behave you two. Do not make me go knife hand mode

 Iron_Captain wrote:
1. Our understanding of God is a being than which no greater can be conceived.
2. The idea of God exists in the mind.
3. A being that exists both in the mind and in reality is greater than a being that exists only in the mind.
4. If God only exists in the mind, then we can conceive of a greater being—that which exists in reality.
5. We cannot imagine something that is greater than God.
6. Therefore, God exists.

I would like to accept the above theology, but I must admit it looks too much it is pulling a fast one.