The Ontological Argument for the Existence of God

[God of Mr. Hanky]

Please do. It'd make a nice change from being paraphrased.

I was hoping you's say yes. You said--and this what was said in its entirety and not taken out of context--:

I cry at a lot of things. Despite being Cyberman, I admit to having human feelings. If that's not spiritual, I would happily accede to an upgrade to my vocabulary algorithm.

Though the words “feeling” and “spiritual” are inseparably related, they do not mean the the same thing. This statement uses the word “spiritual” to mean “feeling” even though the words are not equivalent. It's like saying the keel of a ship is the ship itself. It's this kind of frivolous misuse of words that leads to so much confusion.

Rather than admit to misspeaking, what followed was a defense of the undefensible.

Once upon a time, the word "spirit" was coined as a reference to what resides in your head. It was believed to be something immortal, which would go somewhere when the body dies.

Once upon a time a bit later, the word "mind" was coined by the inquisitive and the curious on all matters human, and what really makes us tick. They substituted "spirit" for this word so that they could write about what they learned and avoid pissing off the jealous "spiritual" authorities.

The mind was never presumed immortal, but if you have to stand in judgment before your god at the end of your life, then it would be no just trial if you remembered nothing which your mind accumulated memories of before it died. Therefore, the mind must be the spirit, and vice versa.

That neither mind nor spirit (whatever word you choose it means the same) have not been shown to go on after death, following thousands of years of time wasted on this argument, is more than a good case for presuming there is no afterlife for the spirit-mind.