Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   If anythings possible is it possible for something to be impossible?
Stephen ben Yeshua
Inactive Member


Message 16 of 22 (91975)
03-12-2004 1:00 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Reef
03-11-2004 11:36 PM


Reef,
Define "thing."
Stephen
PS. Also distinquish "any" thing and "all" things.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Reef, posted 03-11-2004 11:36 PM Reef has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 18 by Reef, posted 03-12-2004 1:03 AM Stephen ben Yeshua has replied

  
Reef
Inactive Member


Message 17 of 22 (91976)
03-12-2004 1:02 AM
Reply to: Message 15 by 1.61803
03-12-2004 1:00 AM


ever think theres a possiblity your wrong!!!
your right anyone can go around saying anything is possible because it is.....but i asked if this is true then is it possible for something to be impossible...i want someone who can answer that... not some guy who sees everything in black and white.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by 1.61803, posted 03-12-2004 1:00 AM 1.61803 has not replied

  
Reef
Inactive Member


Message 18 of 22 (91977)
03-12-2004 1:03 AM
Reply to: Message 16 by Stephen ben Yeshua
03-12-2004 1:00 AM


anything = any eventuality of any situation

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by Stephen ben Yeshua, posted 03-12-2004 1:00 AM Stephen ben Yeshua has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by Stephen ben Yeshua, posted 03-12-2004 2:12 AM Reef has replied

  
Stephen ben Yeshua
Inactive Member


Message 19 of 22 (92007)
03-12-2004 2:12 AM
Reply to: Message 18 by Reef
03-12-2004 1:03 AM


Reef,
So, any statement is possibly true, simply by changing the definitions appropriately, which is possible? That is, if we define "impossible" to mean, "not, under the current definitions, possible" then it becomes possible by changing the definitions.
But, who controls the definitions? Whoever it is, they are close to, if not actually, omnipotent.
Thus, your question exposes our inclination to take definitions for granted, even when we make statements that require revision of definitions. This is a fatal flaw in philosophy. We are supposed to always be asking, what do you mean by this word? That grammatical construction? Pressed in this way, the sort of paradoxes you devise evaporate.
Not that God ever claims to be omnipotent. He does encourage us to believe that all things are possible to us, if we have faith, and that no "thing" that we can imagine or might reasonably want is too difficult for Him. Any understanding we might have that would lead us to not take advantage of that promise, is the sort of understanding that He instructs us never to trust.
Feel guilty for all the problems you have ever seen, that you did not pray aright to fix. Count on it. You will be eventually called to account for this omission. And any argument that you were dissuaded by a logical paradox won't save you.
Stephen

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by Reef, posted 03-12-2004 1:03 AM Reef has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by Reef, posted 03-12-2004 2:35 AM Stephen ben Yeshua has replied

  
Reef
Inactive Member


Message 20 of 22 (92015)
03-12-2004 2:35 AM
Reply to: Message 19 by Stephen ben Yeshua
03-12-2004 2:12 AM


no this is not about the meaning of words its about mathematical probabilities
if every eventuality has a probability of happening X and a probability of not happening Y
(P) X + Y = 1 (it will either happen or it wont)
but its the equation itself that poses the question
what is the (P) X + Y not= 1 (the answer shud be 0)
but as everything has a probability above 0 this cannot be mathematicaly true

This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by Stephen ben Yeshua, posted 03-12-2004 2:12 AM Stephen ben Yeshua has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by Stephen ben Yeshua, posted 03-12-2004 3:12 AM Reef has not replied
 Message 22 by Mr. Bound, posted 03-18-2004 3:57 PM Reef has not replied

  
Stephen ben Yeshua
Inactive Member


Message 21 of 22 (92025)
03-12-2004 3:12 AM
Reply to: Message 20 by Reef
03-12-2004 2:35 AM


Reef,
I don't see the connection between these math statements and your query, but the probability of not X is defined as 1-p(X), so the math always works.
S.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by Reef, posted 03-12-2004 2:35 AM Reef has not replied

  
Mr. Bound
Inactive Member


Message 22 of 22 (93179)
03-18-2004 3:57 PM
Reply to: Message 20 by Reef
03-12-2004 2:35 AM


How do you know?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by Reef, posted 03-12-2004 2:35 AM Reef has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024