For instance, why would it be logically impossible for a man to create another person ex-nihlo without the assistance of God?
I tried to create a pebble & failed. If anyone has succeded
they’ve kept it to themselves
Never mind why. Man has never created something out of nothing. That is good enough for me.
It is not even logically possible for God. Nor Biblical.
We do ex-nihlo any time that we freely decide.
ex ni·hi·lo – out of nothing… especially universes and Life Itself.
Does creating a song or poem count?
Even then, I am using abilities and inspiration that in some way, whether directly or indirectly, trace back to God.
No we haven’t.
Everything we’ve created comes from preexisting material, be it a chair or a painting. Even our thoughts are formed from things we’ve experienced.
No we don’t. Our decisions are the result of processing various stimuli to arrive at a conclusion. Those stimuli form our decision making process, along with the pre-existing processes of our mind. Therefore, choices are not ex-nihilo.
No, it is not possible for anything other than God to create ex nihilo, whether it be man or even angel. All created things are only able to act on actual things that already exist.
If you can believe one god that created out of nothing, you can believe in any number of beings that also have the same power. People have been imagining these beings for as long as they have been imagining beings. There is no proof that anything was ever created out of nothing although some, including Catholics, believe it to have happened.
You presuppose that there is a God and only one God at that.
Believe it or not theologians and philosophers have actually spoken to and provided demonstrations as to why there can only be one such being with such a power and that it is results in a logical absurdity if one supposes there be more than one.
I think it’s not possible from a Catholic point of view. That’s why we call God “the Creator”.
Tolkien (a devout Catholic) stated in his books that his dark lord Morgoth couldn’t creat anything only corrupt that what’s made by the creator.
Are you always a part of chain of causality? No. This means that you can initiate a chain of causality when you decide freely. Otherwise you wouldn’t be responsible for your decision.
We are all part of a chain of causality. I am influenced by the decisions I’ve made in the past, as well as what I see around me, which is similarly influenced. Given this knowledge and understanding of the chain of causality that has come before, I make decisions. I operate my free will within the chain to add an additional link to it.
Your post is, as ever, a non-sequitur. Being influenced by a preceding chain of events in no way inhibits my free will, but I hold no pretense that you will even consider that you are wrong. Feel free to respond, but I won’t be wasting my time with it any further.
Yes, insofar as you are always ontologically dependent on something else. Even in choosing, there are things that prompt decisions, objects of the will, etc…
No. That doesn’t follow.
As you wish.
The options define a situation when you want to make a decision. Options are the result of past decisions and how the world rolls around you. We won’t exercise our free will when we prefer an option since our decision is biased by a reason. We only make free decision when the decision is not biased by a reason. You cannot escape this: Your decision is either for a reason or it is not (when you equally like options for example). Your decision is not free in the first case and it is free in the second case.
No one is pre-supposing. God has revealed Himself to Man.
Until you define “something” and “nothing” this question is unanswerable.
For example, is the concept of something…something. If it is, then an omniscient God can’t possibly create something out of nothing. While I would argue that I as a solipsist can.
And what about potency, is potency something? And can even an omnipotent God make something exist, that doesn’t have the potential to exist? Here I would argue that not even I as a solipsist can do that.
So the question depends upon what constitutes nothing. But it also depends upon what constitutes something. Is a vision in your mind something? And how would that differ from a concept in your mind? Can a vision in your mind be said to be something, but a concept isn’t. And how do you know that everything isn’t simply a concept in your mind, created from nothing.
So to answer this question one must first define what nothing is, and what something is. And depending upon how you do that, it could be argued that not even God can create something out of nothing.