The last time I tried to apply logic in an argument concerning philosophy on here, I was informed it doesn't apply to real life :p
But I'll try again, regarding the rock-God question: What it's asking is essentially "Can God do something he can't do"?
The question is actually implying incoherent propositions, so it's meaningless in the first place. In hypothetically stating the existence of God in the beginning, the question inevitably accepts the definition of said hypothetical God as all powerful (indeed, a lifter of all rocks). Then the question introduces the term "a rock God can't lift". Well... that already contradicts the hypothetical scenario we set up.
It's certainly tricky to recognize as it seems to emphasize the ability to do an action (create) rather than emphasizing the contradictory predicate (the rock God can't lift).
Thus as a contradictory question it may be called false or meaningless. I think we could recognize many false questions more easily than this. E.g. "How many miles are in a square"?
If you don't accept any of what I just said, the question is a trite misrepresentation of omnipotence if anything else.
Okami
To lavish praise upon this title, the assumption of a common plateau between player and game must be made. I won't open my unworthy mouth.
