Moonduck - I'm not saying that there aren't a lot of things that would seem possible now that might be in the future; I just don't agree with your assertion that
anything is possible, by an individual, regardless of situation (even lacking arms etc). What if "the way" for the BIAV to 'unlock the telekinetic potential of its mind' involved use of a tinfoil hat. The BIAV could sit quite happily knowing it
could have telekinesis, except for the lack of hat. (or insert more palatable example, you can see where I'm going)
All I am saying is that knowing that something is impossible is a form of knowledge. You said earlier that the BIAV must 'know how to do X' because '
Otherwise that would be something it wouldn't know - making it not omniscient' - but what if it simply knows that it can't be done.
I agree that we can be limited, and that things we currently consider impossible might one day be realised to be so - but you seem to be making the very strong claim that not only is
nothing impossible, but that
everything is possible for
everyone.
Alternatively, it could be that you have found a flaw with the concept of omniscience:
assumption 1 - 'x is omniscient' means that for all actions A, x knows how to do A (aka
Moonduck's assumption
)
assumption 2a - there exists at least one action, B, and one person, y, such that is impossible for y to do B (aka
cliche's weak assumption)
- or -
assumption 2b - there exists at least one action, B, such that for all persons y, it is impossible for y to do B (
cliche's strong assumption)
(I like this bit because we get to use our ideas together rather than arguing as we have been doing
):
Combining 1 + 2a : it is impossible for y to be omniscient; for if we claim he knows everything we fall into the trap you mentioned earlier: 'Otherwise that would be something it wouldn't know - making it not omniscient'
Combining 1 + 2b (my favourite) : omniscience is impossible
What do you think?