The Ontological Argument for the Existence of God

[athrock]

Now, actually looking at the points to break down the problems of the argument:

• P1 is technically true, but you're dealing with nonfalsifiable things here, so take anything that follows with a grain of salt. Lots of grains of salt.
  
• P2 is not given at all. You'd have to prove that there are multiple "possible worlds".
  
• P3 is a non sequitur and cannot be inferred from any of the previous points.
  
• P4 is building off of P3, which is already not logically valid.
  
• P5 is logically valid, but is based off of P3 and P4, so it is not reasonable to infer, despite being logically correct in itself.
  
• The conclusion would also be valid, if not built off of P3 and P4.
  

So, that's where it all falls apart. I mean, once you take out the formal sounding syllogism, you're basically saying "if something could be real, it is real". I shouldn't have to explain why that's dumb. Again, leprechauns could be real.

Yeah!     Finally, someone else sees it.

Well, actually no. I've already said that I think this argument is toast, but Premise (3) is not the problem.

Any being which is MAXIMALLY GREAT cannot be limited in the number of worlds in which it exists. Otherwise, another being which is NOT limited in that way is conceivable thereby making the limited being sub-maximal.

So, no...if a maximally great being exists at all, it must exist in all worlds.

---

I have never seen this argument before, so I'm interested in some discussion of it. A philosopher by the name of Alvin Plantinga states it this way:

The Ontological Argument

1. It is possible that a maximally great being exists.
   
2. If it is possible that a maximally great being exists, then a maximally great being exists is some possible world.
   
3. If a maximally great being exists in some possible world, then it exists in every possible world.
   
4. If a maximally great being exists in every possible world, then it exists in the actual world.
   
5. If a maximally great being exists in the actual world, then a maximally great being exists.
   
6. Therefore, a maximally great being exists.
   

Thoughts?

That actually makes sense.

But now replace 'maximally great being' with 'thing that makes maximally great being's existence impossible'.

There you go. You just proved God exists and I killed him for you. Do I get cookies?

Not really. 

A "maximally great being" is not merely a superhuman being with characteristics that are a lot like ours only bigger and better. God is not merely Superman.



One of the properties of a "maximally great being" is that it does not "come into existence". It has always existed.

So, if it is your conclusion that the Ontological Argument proves that God exists, and you have failed to kill him, then you are left with an existent God.

---

A maximally great being is incompatible with many type of worlds/universes. It is not possible in every possible world unless you define "possible" world as only what is compatible with God.  But if it's not defined circularly, there is infinite possible universes in which a maximally great being is incompatible with just as there are infinite possible universes he is compatible with.

Since all worlds are material/natural, how would any of them be incompatible with a god who is not material and supernatural?

Your multi-verse can be whatever you want it to be...and a supreme, supernatural, non-material being would still be outside of them all.