PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
June 3, 20260 citationsOpen Access

THE IRRATIONAL EXIT: God, Structural Incompleteness

View Full Paper
KJkritagya Joshi

Key Points

  • The paper investigates the structural incoherence of the concept of a supreme being within logical systems.
  • Presents four interlocking demonstrations about existence and theological predication.
  • Analyzes epistemological constraints on propositions about transcendent infinities.
  • Critiques Plantinga’s S5 argument regarding maximal excellence.
  • Establishes that complete definitions of existence require external viewpoints, leading to an infinite regress.
  • Indicates that all totalizing theological predication is epistemically ungrounded.
  • Concludes that theological certainty represents a pathology in cognitive practices, which is supported by critiques from Nietzsche and Bhagat Singh.

Abstract

This paper argues that the concept of a supreme being is not merely unverifiable but structurally incoherent: it occupies the position of an irrational exit from a logical system that cannot legitimately generate such an exit from within its own axioms. Four interlocking demonstrations are advanced. First, any complete definition of existence requires a viewpoint external to existence, generating an infinite boundary-regress that forecloses stable theological ground — a problem established on purely epistemological and semantic grounds, without appeal to results in formal mathematics beyond their proper domain. Second, the resulting definition vacuum renders all theological predication that quantifies over the totality of existence epistemically ungrounded rather than merely incomplete. Third, the principle of epistemological closure entails that no finite cognitive system can generate a well-formed proposition about a transcendent infinite whose boundary is constitutively inaccessible; the key predicates of Anselmian, cosmological, and modal ontological arguments are shown to be expressions without stable denotation within the system that generates them. Fourth, the claim that Plantinga’s S5 argument establishes the coherence of maximal excellence is resisted not on epistemic-access grounds but on the prior question of the joint satisfiability of maximised properties, each of which is an asymptotic extrapolation from finite patterns. The paper concludes with a strengthened toxin thesis: that theological certainty — including its sophisticated Bayesian reformulations — constitutes a systematic pathology of cognitive practice, one that has been independently diagnosed, from outside the Euro-American analytic tradition, by Nietzsche’s critique of cognitive subordination and Bhagat Singh’s analysis of the externally grounded normative order. The pathology is not the holding of false beliefs but the institutional suppression of the inquiry that would identify and revise them.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

kritagya Joshi (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a1fc509dee9eb8c0dce6866https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.20487124
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper