God: Shifting Arguments and the Codexation Dilemma

Abstract

The Phrenological Argument, also known as God's Parapraxis, is a new provocative philosophical argument that showcases God's Mental State of Inadequacy in his creation of the Human Mind. Lawsin* argues that if God has a perfect mind flawlessly capable of knowing things in advance, then he should have anticipated ahead of time the repercussions of creating a human mind that cannot fathom Truth and Reality. But since he created a mind incapable of knowing what is real and what is true, then it shows God carries an erroneous lapse somewhere in his memory. This mental erracity offers good solid evidence that proves God is not after all all-knowing. The basic form of the argument is: 1. God created the mind 2. The mind cannot detect truth and reality 3. therefore, God will never be known. A modified version: 1. If God created the mind for men to know him 2. But god failed to foresee his parapraxis 3. Then, god is not all-knowing. A follow-up variation: 1. If God is real 2. But the mind can't detect reality 3. Therefore, the mind can't detect god. Furthermore, man created the idea of god. Like all ideas, the idea of god is also nothing but an assumption, a guesswork, a supposition. For example, Zero and One are abstract concepts. They don't exist in the natural world. They are not naturally inherent. They only exist in the mind by assumption. Mathematically, both words are called numerals by definition. When Zero is represented with the symbol 0 and One with 1, technically, the words become numbers by association. Numbers are the assumed physical representations of abstract numerals. By symbolic representation, both digits now exist outside the mind - the physical world - the world outside of ourselves - the inherent world that existed a long time independently before the mind. However, although 0 & 1 are created by definition, association, representation, and assumption, are these numbers now solid objects or physical materials? If I write 0 and 1 on a paper, are they materially or physically real now? Can we consider the written numbers as proof of their existence? Can the numbers be proven as solid evidence prescribed by the scientific method? How can we validate the paper's evidence to be true, false, valid, or real? Do they really exist or are the numbers still abstract, imaginary, or imagined? If they are still abstract, therefore all ideas man has thought of or conceptualized are all assumptions, guesswork, or nothing but merely suppositions (The Lawsin Conjecture/Codexation Dilemma).

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,709

External links

  • This entry has no external links. Add one.
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

  • Only published works are available at libraries.

Similar books and articles

Are There Neural Correlates of Consciousness?A. Noe & E. Thompson - 2004 - Journal of Consciousness Studies 11 (1):3-28.
Is consciousness epiphenomenal? Comment on Susan Pockett.Gilberto Gomes - 2005 - Journal of Consciousness Studies 12 (12):77-79.
Are there neural correlates of consciousness?Alva Noë & Evan Thompson - 2004 - Journal of Consciousness Studies 11 (1):3-28.
why the neural correlates of consciousness cannot be found.Bernard Molyneux - 2010 - Journal of Consciousness Studies 17 (9-10):168-188.
The search for neural correlates of consciousness.Jakob Hohwy - 2007 - Philosophy Compass 2 (3):461–474.
What is a global state of consciousness?Andy Kenneth Mckilliam - 2020 - Philosophy and the Mind Sciences 1 (II).

Analytics

Added to PP
2021-01-18

Downloads
0

6 months
0

Historical graph of downloads

Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references