(December 23, 2015 at 4:30 pm)Quantum Wrote: Self-explanatory subversion of the tired apologist standard.I just wanted to put it out there.
Here you go.
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/camelswithh...ainst-god/
Quote:So here’s the strategy: First, agree with the theist that the Ontological Argument is a sound argument for the existence of the MPB. Second, show that the MPB cannot possibly be the theistic deity. Hence the Ontological Argument becomes an anti-theistic argument: it is a wonderful argument for showing that God does not exist. But by all means, use the Ontological Argument to justify the existence of the universe, or mathematical reality taken as a whole, or the best of all possible worlds, or some other godless reality.
The same strategy can be applied to the classical cosmological arguments and the universe-level design arguments. For instance, the same strategy can be applied to the so-called fine-tuning argument, to show that any apparent fine-tuning of our universe for life (or, if you prefer, the anthropic coincidences) is an argument against the existence of God.
It is very important not to mistake hemlock for parsley, but to believe or not believe in God is not important at all. - Denis Diderot
We are the United States of Amnesia, we learn nothing because we remember nothing. - Gore Vidal
We are the United States of Amnesia, we learn nothing because we remember nothing. - Gore Vidal
