(March 12, 2017 at 5:48 pm)TheAtheologian Wrote:(March 7, 2017 at 12:52 pm)SteveII Wrote:
The main problems with this argument is with 1 and 3. First, "great" is a value statement which is contingent upon the subjective viewer. The question is, what constitutes objective greatness? 1 is simply an assertion with no basis in reality than what anyone would personally think to be true.
3 is false since greatness is logically separable from logical necessity. Value statements have no basis in possibility. Just as you can't derive an ought from an is, you can't derive an is from an ought.
Elvis Presley is a great being to many people, I can say that he is a necessary being. It would be no less accurate to say that than to say God is a necessary being. The assertion that God is necessary has no justification. Maximal greatness is subjective if you accept that greatness is subjective, since the measurement of greatness would be subjective, it would apply to whatever you would measure to be the "greatest".
That is a common objection, but there are answers to it. I posted a response a few pages back that I will repost below. Great making properties of god are not subjective like a preference to Elvis' music. These are not properties subject to tastes, aesthetics, etc. It is also important to note that it doesn't matter to the argument if we can even comprehend them.
Quote:
Please note before objecting that this argument is considered sound by Oppy and other atheist philosophers (you have to follow the 12 steps outlined in the link). In fact, Oppy, in a debate with Maydole focuses on the fact that the whole Ontological Argument may be sound, but is not convincing. That might be so, but that is another matter.
If you think you have found an objection that undermines the argument, please refer to one of the 12 steps where you think he erred.