So, God is a being of pure logic, thought thinking on itself.

Is it not possible that since there are many logically viable arguments that contradict each other because of the presupposition required to make the logical argument in the first place, and the Unmovable Thinker is incapable of illogic, and therefore of even having presuppositions, is it not then possible that existence is a sort of social experiment in which irrational beings capable of rational thought are brought into existence to prove which of these logically viable claims works the past in a practical sense?

Ie, here's a Transcendent Existentialist, here's a Cartesian, here's an Empiricist, here's a Platonist.  Let's see who survives.

Suppose that there are ideas to believe in.

Is there an argument to go with your proposition?

QuoteIs there an argument to go with your proposition?

It is commonly agreed that there is things that are unknown. The metaphysical world is something. Do you not believe this?

I prefer the term "presuppose" because "belief" is highly irrational.

I do agree that the metaphysical world is unknown, but not entirely.  There are some common beliefs held by many philosophers about the function of the mind, particularly that our perceptions are created by ideas.  So on and so forth.

But let's just roll with the train of logic with the presupposition I've argued.  Is it a feasible world?  If so, why?  If not, why not?  Literary references?

I thought this would be a fun little thought experiment.

QuoteLiterary references?

Alva Noe  "Out of Our Heads"

Aristotle's unmoved mover was created primarily as a way to explain planetary motion, not existance. The unmoved mover didn't create anything, according to Aristotle, as accoring to him everything that exists has always existed. Of course, this is false, as we know about evolution and have seen in human history many species go extinct. 

More than that, he even thought that there may be more than one unmoved mover for each planetary sphere. The greek astronomers of his time believed that each planet moved on its own sphere, combining to make a mechanical contraption that moved the heavens. Aristotle believed this contraption is set in motion by the planets' love for the unmoved mover, or at least the UM for their sphere. Yes, that's right, Arisotle's answer to what moves the planets? Love. Aristotle was brilliant, but even geniuses can believe things that are utterly stupid.