Worlds Otherwise Empty
So, the "empty essence lemma" - found from the benefit of a computer proof checking study has found that the empty "self-difference" S in a set T (as defined by S= T\S and with S made empty by putting S=φ), is a valid essence for **every** individual, also fulfilling Godel's definition of an essence.
So, if God is permitted an empty essence, there are possibly real-world disjunctions with one side empty, a world in which there are no positive predicates at all: but then such a world does not or can not exist. Yet the empty set belongs to every set and the empty essence hits its bullseye by targeting every disjunction, each found in the equivalence to the empty middle formed on a disjunction with an always present and yet empty world.
It gets worse: for God is certainly able to rest on an otherwise empty world made so but for His essence in "e". I.e. e ∨ Ω, say. Then the empty essence is always found on the empty middle of every true disjunction - a logical impossibility of existence but an ever present lemma.
Yet when God chooses a disjunction He always leaves one side exeunt altogether, so that "e_{r} ∨ e_{p}&e_{r-1}=>e_{s}" exits on the right side as only e_{p}&e_{r}=>e_{s}, fulfilling the additive operation of the octal. So, is there always an empty world?
Such worlds were or are never made extant, so they are void. God, need not create every possible world at all.
The empty essence confuses the possible choices that may be freely made in a consistent didactic paradigm and thereby also by God. The empty middle is **never** to be instantiated, and the lemma fails as if it were near-necessary: yet the result, that there is yet modal collapse is a deficiency in theory rather than in reality as of the octal; there need not be every predicate on the exeunt side of any disjunction without complete modal collapse in the octal itself (as shown in the sixteenth chapter of "Seven Eyes Open" (4th edition)).
So, the place of that empty middle is found not with an empty world (empty but for the Godlike essence of necessary existence alone), but in the middle between possible worlds, and only has a place outside of the actual world having exited any disjunction.
The sneaky bit - of the ever present empty set in every set permits the empty essence to appear to violate a system it may not: for there is never an empty member in an ultrafilter, and I could easily reformulate the theory to account for the fact that the empty essence is no positive predicate. If there is a truly convincing proof that only positive properties follow from any Godlike essence, I would require the question going begging. The octal needs first be constructed before I may state that the logical middle negated is positive only.
Yet S&(T\S) = T and therein is again found certain modal collapse. For any Pos(s) in S entails all of T (S is always empty) so, if T be positive, then S is its logical equivalent; but the middle is always negative and I would "rewrite God" in perhaps the largest display of the dialectic method possible. That middle is assumed to be always a positive predicate and every individual is rewritten as a fallacy in that essence, a work not made whole (or made at all).
Then that "empty" middle can not ever be found positive! Then the empty essence will not follow from the Godlike essence.
Continue To Next Page
Return To Section Start
Return To Previous Page |