RE: The Ontological Argument for the Existence of God
December 21, 2015 at 2:59 pm
(This post was last modified: December 21, 2015 at 3:06 pm by God of Mr. Hanky.)
(December 21, 2015 at 1:52 pm)Delicate Wrote: It would be nice if, instead of 100 people making 200 feeble objections to the ontological argument, there could be one, singular, comprehensive refutation that would convince people the ontological argument was fallacious.
Can someone come up with something like that? That would help.
Puh-leeeze, stop pretending you have the slightest interest in refuting any argument for your imaginary friend.
The reason you see these unwelcome (to you) objections to the ontological argument is that we have two eyes, we understand how logic works, and we see the fallacy in it. This has already been pointed out ad nauseum, you cannot cheat the logic of scientific possibility by substituting in statistical probability without getting your ass kicked out of the science arena. Unlike statistical math, science doesn't pre-quantify possibilities, therefore this insult to science for an argument fails with the second statement.
I'd be happy to see one theist's argument which doesn't cheat, even though that would not stand alone without evidence. Maybe this is because you cannot have an argument which doesn't cheat (become fallacious) without empirical evidence in support of your claim.
Mr. Hanky loves you!
