Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: October 1, 2024, 10:41 am
Atheist Forums › Discussion › Skepticism & Pseudoscience v
Modal ontological argument

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Thread Modes
Modal ontological argument
R00tKiT Offline
Banned
Religious Views: Sunni Islam
Posts: 1101
Threads: 15
Joined: November 29, 2019
Reputation: 2
#71
RE: Modal ontological argument
February 2, 2022 at 5:37 pm
(February 2, 2022 at 5:31 pm)The Grand Nudger Wrote: In the sense of possible worlds semantics you numpty. ...what the fuck...?

You didn't answer my question, you say an empty world exists. As long as you don't care to explain what you mean by empty world, empty is nonexistent. A nonexistent world .. can't.. exist. Not a possible world.
Find
Reply
The Grand Nudger Offline
Retired Staff
*****
Religious Views: Invasive
Posts: 66922
Threads: 140
Joined: June 28, 2011
Reputation: 162
#72
RE: Modal ontological argument
February 2, 2022 at 5:38 pm
Because an empty world possibly exists in possible world semantics by default. Learn the subject you deign to comment on.
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!
Find
Reply
R00tKiT Offline
Banned
Religious Views: Sunni Islam
Posts: 1101
Threads: 15
Joined: November 29, 2019
Reputation: 2
#73
RE: Modal ontological argument
February 2, 2022 at 5:38 pm
(February 2, 2022 at 5:32 pm)polymath257 Wrote: No, the container is not in the world defined by the container.

The container is then a mental construct, nonexistent. Exactly as I predicted.
Find
Reply
The Grand Nudger Offline
Retired Staff
*****
Religious Views: Invasive
Posts: 66922
Threads: 140
Joined: June 28, 2011
Reputation: 162
#74
RE: Modal ontological argument
February 2, 2022 at 5:40 pm (This post was last modified: February 2, 2022 at 5:42 pm by The Grand Nudger.)
Well thats that..then, your stupid god is a mental construct, so say you.

Conveniently, that's why I'm an atheist and an antitheist. I appreciate it when some god bothering loon explicitly makes my case.
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!
Find
Reply
R00tKiT Offline
Banned
Religious Views: Sunni Islam
Posts: 1101
Threads: 15
Joined: November 29, 2019
Reputation: 2
#75
RE: Modal ontological argument
February 2, 2022 at 5:42 pm
(February 2, 2022 at 5:31 pm)Jehanne Wrote:
(February 2, 2022 at 5:24 pm)Klorophyll Wrote: Fake Messiah dismissed all variants (including Godel's, then) because he thinks they contain fallacies.. so no, not everyone thinks Godel's logic is sound.

Where does he say that?

https://atheistforums.org/thread-63785-p...pid2087444

Quote : "The bullshit premise is bullshit no matter who studied it". Obviously Godel is included.

(February 2, 2022 at 5:38 pm)The Grand Nudger Wrote: Because an empty world possibly exists in possible world semantics by default.  Learn the subject you deign to comment on.

No, you misunderstand. An "empty world" is just like a "squared circle". It's not a possible world. And kindly define what you mean by empty.
Find
Reply
Jehanne Away
Senior Member
****
Religious Views: n/a
Posts: 7259
Threads: 506
Joined: December 12, 2015
Reputation: 22
#76
RE: Modal ontological argument
February 2, 2022 at 5:44 pm
(February 2, 2022 at 5:42 pm)Klorophyll Wrote:
(February 2, 2022 at 5:31 pm)Jehanne Wrote: Where does he say that?

https://atheistforums.org/thread-63785-p...pid2087444

Quote : "The bullshit premise is bullshit no matter who studied it". Obviously Godel is included.

(February 2, 2022 at 5:38 pm)The Grand Nudger Wrote: Because an empty world possibly exists in possible world semantics by default.  Learn the subject you deign to comment on.

No, you misunderstand. An "empty world" is just like a "squared circle". It's not a possible world. And kindly define what you mean by empty.

Yeah, the premises are questionable; that's where Professor Godel went off the rails.
Find
Reply
The Grand Nudger Offline
Retired Staff
*****
Religious Views: Invasive
Posts: 66922
Threads: 140
Joined: June 28, 2011
Reputation: 162
#77
RE: Modal ontological argument
February 2, 2022 at 5:44 pm (This post was last modified: February 2, 2022 at 5:46 pm by The Grand Nudger.)
OFC an empty world is possible, just like an empty parking lot is possible. You told us before this was a shit argument, but you're desperately at bat against it's instantiation in the here and now. What's wrong with you?

Cant make up your god bothering mind, can you, lol.
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!
Find
Reply
Jehanne Away
Senior Member
****
Religious Views: n/a
Posts: 7259
Threads: 506
Joined: December 12, 2015
Reputation: 22
#78
RE: Modal ontological argument
February 2, 2022 at 5:46 pm (This post was last modified: February 2, 2022 at 5:46 pm by Jehanne.)
(February 2, 2022 at 5:37 pm)Klorophyll Wrote:
(February 2, 2022 at 5:31 pm)The Grand Nudger Wrote: In the sense of possible worlds semantics you numpty. ...what the fuck...?

You didn't answer my question, you say an empty world exists. As long as you don't care to explain what you mean by empty world, empty is nonexistent. A nonexistent world .. can't.. exist. Not a possible world.

We live in an expanding Universe, correct? What, exactly, is the Universe expanding in to?
Find
Reply
Angrboda Offline
Bringer Of Grief
*****
Religious Views: Help me, Obi-Wan Kenobi. You’re my only hope.
Posts: 29353
Threads: 115
Joined: February 22, 2011
Reputation: 159
#79
RE: Modal ontological argument
February 2, 2022 at 5:46 pm (This post was last modified: February 2, 2022 at 5:47 pm by Angrboda.)
Besides, it's trivially easy to overcome if it hadn't already been done so, twice, by pointing out that a possible world without God in it is perfectly coherent, unless one is insisting that God must exist, which would be a big fail.
[Image: extraordinarywoo-sig.jpg]
Find
Reply
R00tKiT Offline
Banned
Religious Views: Sunni Islam
Posts: 1101
Threads: 15
Joined: November 29, 2019
Reputation: 2
#80
RE: Modal ontological argument
February 2, 2022 at 5:54 pm
(February 2, 2022 at 5:44 pm)The Grand Nudger Wrote: OFC an empty world is possible, just like an empty parking lot is possible.   You told us before this was a shit argument, but you're desperately at bat against it's instantiation in the here and now.  What's wrong with you?

An empty parking lot is an area of ground... If that's how you imagine an empty world, you no longer have an empty world. Needless to say that you're already equivocating on the word "empty".

(February 2, 2022 at 5:46 pm)Jehanne Wrote: We live in an expanding Universe, correct?  What, exactly, is the Universe expanding in to?

It's not expanding into anything. it's just expanding. Because the universe is already *everything*.

(February 2, 2022 at 5:46 pm)Angrboda Wrote: Besides, it's trivially easy to overcome if it hadn't already been done so, twice, by pointing out that a possible world without God in it is perfectly coherent, unless one is insisting that God must exist, which would be a big fail.

I agree that a possible world without a deity is logically coherent. Our position of course is that this world points to a deity.
Find
Reply


Atheist Forums › Discussion › Skepticism & Pseudoscience v
Modal ontological argument



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)