“We must conclude that any proposition (definition) of abstract concepts (linguistically or philosophically) is not necessarily a proposition (definition) of that to which these concepts or propositions (definitions) ought to be applied. This kind of thinking, or definitions coming from such thinking, is inherently false.

On the other hand, if the supposed or proposed argument reflected reality, it would be a definition of a fact and not a proposition (“definition”) of an imagined concept. Laplace didn’t show interest in proving that this is the actual reality or even stating it, so it must be that he either imagined his argument as a hypothesis or he believed that this example argument contains enough merits of itself to justify not only the argument but also the fact or truth itself.

From our point of view and the idea of the Universal Mind as having a potential for infinite variety, we can conclude that even an “intellect” of a Universal Mind cannot predict and know all the varieties of its potential and the potential of all possible universes in infinity, which saves it from its own perfection while opening the door for infinite potential of the “free will.”