Posts: 6609
Threads: 73
Joined: May 31, 2014
Reputation:
56
RE: The Ontological Argument for the Existence of God
February 5, 2016 at 1:53 pm
(February 5, 2016 at 1:43 pm)Nestor Wrote: (February 5, 2016 at 3:21 am)robvalue Wrote: "Maximally great" is a childish concept. It's just a blatant attempt to leave no room for someone else to come along with a "bigger God". I have to disagree. I find the ontological argument, and the idea of perfection in general, quite intriguing... I don't know that I'd consider it an argument for "God" per se (the definition of god tends to include quite a few more things than simply perfection or maximal greatness or whatever), but as far as such arguments go, I think it may be the best.
The argument is a mind fuck for me, to be honest. I know the problem lies with the first premise, and in general what the problem is, but still a clever argument.
Posts: 67175
Threads: 140
Joined: June 28, 2011
Reputation:
162
RE: The Ontological Argument for the Existence of God
February 5, 2016 at 2:17 pm
(This post was last modified: February 5, 2016 at 2:19 pm by The Grand Nudger.)
(February 5, 2016 at 1:46 pm)Irrational Wrote: Maximally great being is defined by Plantinga to be a necessary being. From what I've read, and I'm no expert when it comes to such logic, but it seems third premise must always be true for necessary entities.
True, and that's part of the trouble, the argument doesn't actually -argue- it's way to a conclusion..it assumes and defines it's way to a conclusion that is entirely contained within it's assumptions.
Supposing we can determine actuality by reference to possibility alone in the first place, it's not certain that this argument would be a useful manner in which to do so.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
Posts: 5466
Threads: 36
Joined: November 10, 2014
Reputation:
53
RE: The Ontological Argument for the Existence of God
February 5, 2016 at 7:51 pm
Can anyone explain, in layman's terms, what the modal logic/reasoning thing actually is?
I have a suspicion that my general feelings about philosophy largely being masturbatory gobbledygook will remain in place regardless.
"I was thirsty for everything, but blood wasn't my style" - Live, "Voodoo Lady"
Posts: 4196
Threads: 60
Joined: September 8, 2011
Reputation:
30
RE: The Ontological Argument for the Existence of God
February 5, 2016 at 8:44 pm
(February 5, 2016 at 7:51 pm)KevinM1 Wrote: Can anyone explain, in layman's terms, what the modal logic/reasoning thing actually is?
I have a suspicion that my general feelings about philosophy largely being masturbatory gobbledygook will remain in place regardless.
In the case of "the modal logic/reasoning thing", I totally agree. I read the wiki reference and queried a few of the links, but basically, it is still bull shit. Mostly it boils down to "If it is possible, then it is probable, therefore it is.". Here is a decent link.  Myself, I see too many gaps between the steps and all the "gobbledygook" in the universe cannot fill the gaps. IMHO.
You make people miserable and there's nothing they can do about it, just like god.
-- Homer Simpson
God has no place within these walls, just as facts have no place within organized religion.
-- Superintendent Chalmers
Science is like a blabbermouth who ruins a movie by telling you how it ends. There are some things we don't want to know. Important things.
-- Ned Flanders
Once something's been approved by the government, it's no longer immoral.
-- The Rev Lovejoy
Posts: 5466
Threads: 36
Joined: November 10, 2014
Reputation:
53
RE: The Ontological Argument for the Existence of God
February 5, 2016 at 9:02 pm
Sorry, that link made no sense to me at all. It reads like it wants to be advanced math, but without actual math.
I really have never understood why philosophy carries so much weight, despite taking 3 courses in it in college. I must be missing something fundamental, but I have never figured it out.
"I was thirsty for everything, but blood wasn't my style" - Live, "Voodoo Lady"
Posts: 67175
Threads: 140
Joined: June 28, 2011
Reputation:
162
RE: The Ontological Argument for the Existence of God
February 5, 2016 at 9:43 pm
(This post was last modified: February 5, 2016 at 9:47 pm by The Grand Nudger.)
S5 modal is a way to turn possibility into actuality, we don't know if it actually works, we just have the system. The reason that the argument we were discussing is built the way it is, with all the tautology filler, is that it doesn't even conform to the standards of -that- model without it. You have to get to s5, before you can claim to have done s5 modal logic. The ontological argument doesn't -actually- have enough "meat" to get to the point where s5 is hypothetically valid......
It's really despicable when you think about it. Beyond wrong...and into the territory of intentional deceit.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
Posts: 15452
Threads: 147
Joined: June 15, 2015
Reputation:
88
RE: The Ontological Argument for the Existence of God
February 5, 2016 at 9:45 pm
(February 5, 2016 at 9:43 pm)Rhythm Wrote: S5 modal is a way to turn possibility into actuality, we don't know if it actually works, we just have the system. The reason that the argument we were discussing is built the way it is, with all the taulogy filler, is that it doesn't even conform to the standards of -that- model without it.
Rhythm, you need to wake up and see the light. You are very obviously in denial. Try opening your eyes for once, and you will be amazed.
"Of course, everyone will claim they respect someone who tries to speak the truth, but in reality, this is a rare quality. Most respect those who speak truths they agree with, and their respect for the speaking only extends as far as their realm of personal agreement. It is less common, almost to the point of becoming a saintly virtue, that someone truly respects and loves the truth seeker, even when their conclusions differ wildly."
-walsh
Posts: 67175
Threads: 140
Joined: June 28, 2011
Reputation:
162
RE: The Ontological Argument for the Existence of God
February 5, 2016 at 9:48 pm
(This post was last modified: February 5, 2016 at 9:50 pm by The Grand Nudger.)
Thanks, does that advice come with a tinfoil hat and a moon landing hoax foam finger? How many times do I have to tell you that I don't care whether or not your god exists before it sinks in?
I wouldn't be "amazed" at having my "eyes opened" in the manner you imply, only disgusted. I'd still be me, and not you...in short. But good luck with your superstitions nonetheless.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
Posts: 4196
Threads: 60
Joined: September 8, 2011
Reputation:
30
RE: The Ontological Argument for the Existence of God
February 5, 2016 at 9:49 pm
(February 5, 2016 at 9:45 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: (February 5, 2016 at 9:43 pm)Rhythm Wrote: S5 modal is a way to turn possibility into actuality, we don't know if it actually works, we just have the system. The reason that the argument we were discussing is built the way it is, with all the taulogy filler, is that it doesn't even conform to the standards of -that- model without it.
Rhythm, you need to wake up and see the light. You are very obviously in denial. Try opening your eyes for once, and you will be amazed.
I do not think you really understood Rhythm's reply, or it is you that are in denial.
You make people miserable and there's nothing they can do about it, just like god.
-- Homer Simpson
God has no place within these walls, just as facts have no place within organized religion.
-- Superintendent Chalmers
Science is like a blabbermouth who ruins a movie by telling you how it ends. There are some things we don't want to know. Important things.
-- Ned Flanders
Once something's been approved by the government, it's no longer immoral.
-- The Rev Lovejoy
Posts: 15452
Threads: 147
Joined: June 15, 2015
Reputation:
88
RE: The Ontological Argument for the Existence of God
February 5, 2016 at 9:52 pm
(February 5, 2016 at 9:49 pm)IATIA Wrote: (February 5, 2016 at 9:45 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: Rhythm, you need to wake up and see the light. You are very obviously in denial. Try opening your eyes for once, and you will be amazed.
I do not think you really understood Rhythm's reply, or it is you that are in denial.
I am not in denial. Rhythm needs to come out of the shadows and see the light.
"Of course, everyone will claim they respect someone who tries to speak the truth, but in reality, this is a rare quality. Most respect those who speak truths they agree with, and their respect for the speaking only extends as far as their realm of personal agreement. It is less common, almost to the point of becoming a saintly virtue, that someone truly respects and loves the truth seeker, even when their conclusions differ wildly."
-walsh
|
