The Instigator
Maya9
Pro (for)
Losing
42 Points
The Contender
Tatarize
Con (against)
Winning
45 Points

An omnipotent, perfect creator being cannot exist

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/20/2008 Category: Religion
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 2,224 times Debate No: 4461
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (12)
Votes (23)

 

Maya9

Pro

My argument is simple. The existence of a perfect, omnipotent creator is impossible because the very idea implies that a being can do everything and anything. In other words, there is NOTHING he cannot do. However, the very truth of that statement is prohibitive, restrictive of the aforementioned creator. If he (assuming for the purposes of the simplicity a male persona) cannot do anything wrong, that itself makes him incapable of something. He would therefore be imperfect.
Tatarize

Con

Perfect does not mean omnibenevolent or omnimalevolent.

"If he cannot do anything wrong..." -- The above objection shows that you are misusing the terms and as such perfection does not preclude evil acts. A perfect omnipotent creator being could do something evil. In fact, such a being could do everything evil by virtue of being omnipotent.
Debate Round No. 1
Maya9

Pro

You assume that I meant "wrong" in the sense of "evil." I did not. I meant "wrong" in the sense of "incorrect."
Tatarize

Con

>>You assume that I meant "wrong" in the sense of "evil." I did not. I meant "wrong" in the sense of "incorrect."

An acceptable leap on my part. Thank you for clarifying your argument. Your argument is that a perfect all-powerful being could not do something incorrectly? When we say that you did something wrong, we mean to suggest that the predefined goal of a task was not properly achieved. A perfect all-powerful being could not, for example, make a poorly constructed house while intending to make a well constructed house? But being all powerful, such a being clearly could create every half-assed thing possible.

Your argument roughly breaks down to the idea that there can be no desync between the goals of an perfect all-powerful being and the results of said the implementation of that power? However, clearly there is no goal impossible to do for such a creator being.

In short your argument breaks down to the premise that a perfect all-powerful being cannot fail.

This is however false, all such a being would need to do is stop being perfect and all-powerful and it would fail all the time. If failure were the goal of such a being, that failure would be quickly realized... and if it weren't... paradoxically... it would be.

If such a being simply intended to fail it would. As such doing something wrong is well within the range of talents for the all-powerful.
Debate Round No. 2
Maya9

Pro

So your argument is that a perfect being could only do the one thing I propose he cannot do by ceasing to be perfect? In other words, a perfect being could only exist if at some point he made a decision not to be perfect. Whose argument are you trying to prove?

I would also argue that failure cannot be a goal. If one succeeded in failing, it would nonetheless be a success due to the fact that the desired goal was accomplished.
Tatarize

Con

>>In other words, a perfect being could only exist if at some point he made a decision not to be perfect.

No. The necessity to exist isn't contingent on choosing to do something imperfectly but that that option is not limited.

As a living breathing human being could I kill myself? Clearly then I would neither being living nor breathing and by many definitions remain human. As such, as a semi-powerful living being I could at some point allow myself to be non-powerful as well as not-alive. I am arguing that the same ability is within the preview of an all-powerful being. Such a being could stop being perfect and stop being all powerful.
Debate Round No. 3
12 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by thehaha 8 years ago
thehaha
hi i am new to this site um i would just like to point point out that if pro actually defined the argument that zerosmelt made then i would vote pro but because he did not i voted con just because he had a argument that pro didn't really give a good reason to refute
Posted by Maya9 8 years ago
Maya9
Actually, Zerosmelt was correct. I said that a perfect being can't do something incorrectly.
Posted by Tatarize 8 years ago
Tatarize
Zerosmelt, that argument wasn't offered. The commenters did understand the argument.
Posted by Zerosmelt 8 years ago
Zerosmelt
It amazes me... the string of comments from people who fundamentally don't understand the argument...

lets define x as such

x = a being that does everything it intends to do to the extant that it cannot do something that it didn't intend to do.

x, therefore is limited in its ability; Restricted to only doing actions it intends to do.

Because x has a limited ability x cannot be all powerful (defined here as having no such limitations in ability)

In order for something to truly be all powerful it must not be limited in its ability to act in contradiction to its intention.

-Plz note.. willingly acting in contradiction on one's intention is NOT actually acting in contradiction to one's intention. this is where people are getting confused. IF you willing act in contradiction to your intention then that is your intention intending to do something you didn't intend to do is still intending to do it, and this is the limitation of such a being; x.

the inherent paradox is that
if a being doesn't have any limitations in its ability (i.e. it's all powerful) then it will never be able to unwillingly act in contradiction to its intention. of course it could willingly do this, but then, as stated above it wouldn't actually be acting in contradiction to its intention.

Pro has clearly won this debate... unfortunately the wording can be easily confused.
Posted by Logical-Master 8 years ago
Logical-Master
"As such, an initial all-powerful being could exist. However, after the task is properly completed there would no longer be an all-powerful being."

Ha ha ha! I've never heard that one before. Very witty. Vote CON.
Posted by Tatarize 8 years ago
Tatarize
An all powerful being would simply need to create a very heavy rock then stop being all powerful to the point where he could no longer lift the rock. An all powerful being could create a rock so heavy that he could not lift it, he just couldn't do the entire set of tasks maintaining omnipotence.

As such, an initial all-powerful being could exist. However, after the task is properly completed there would no longer be an all-powerful being.
Posted by necromancer 8 years ago
necromancer
I think pro could have done a much better job with the omniscience paradox, by using the old rock that can't be lifted or even the Flying Spaghetti Monster.
Posted by Alessia_Riddle 8 years ago
Alessia_Riddle
Con definitely wins. By being all-powerful and perfect, he could perfectly do something incorrectly if he decided to.
Posted by Mogget 8 years ago
Mogget
If an all powerful being created a rock that he couldn't lift then it wouldn't be all powerful. -.- All powerful minus one rock perhaps.
Posted by Darkfire62 8 years ago
Darkfire62
The con wins this one hands down. Now I could produce a string of logic that would explain why the pro in this debate loses. Yet quiote simply, logic is not needed in this debate. Putting religion aside for the moment, an omnipotent creator could whatever the creator wants to do, even if it is MEANT to be imperfect. Now with religion, God created this world and meant to create it to be imperefect. This does not make God (or the creator) imperfect. Since this is what I believe the con's case was, I vote for the neg.
23 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by Cliff.Stamp 6 years ago
Cliff.Stamp
Maya9TatarizeTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Tatarize 7 years ago
Tatarize
Maya9TatarizeTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by JBlake 8 years ago
JBlake
Maya9TatarizeTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by Kleptin 8 years ago
Kleptin
Maya9TatarizeTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Vote Placed by rougeagent21 8 years ago
rougeagent21
Maya9TatarizeTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by resolutionsmasher 8 years ago
resolutionsmasher
Maya9TatarizeTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by Logical-Master 8 years ago
Logical-Master
Maya9TatarizeTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by Casiopia 8 years ago
Casiopia
Maya9TatarizeTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by xcaptainkirstiedx 8 years ago
xcaptainkirstiedx
Maya9TatarizeTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by snicker_911 8 years ago
snicker_911
Maya9TatarizeTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03