RE: The Ontological Argument - valid or debunked?
June 21, 2016 at 4:51 am
(This post was last modified: June 21, 2016 at 4:51 am by madog.)
Premise 1: It's possible that a 'maximally great Woo' exists.
Premise 2: If it's possible that a maximally great Woo exists, then a maximally great psychiatrist exists in some possible ward.
Premise 3: If a maximally great psychiatrist exists in some possible ward, then you may exist in a very possible Psychiatry Ward.
Premise 4: If a maximally great psychiatrist exists in every possible ward, then you may exist in an actual Psychiatry Ward.
Premise 5: Therefore a maximally great Woo will exist in an actual Psychiatry Ward.
Premise 6: Therefore a maximally great straight jacket exists
Conclusion: Therefore padded cells exist.
Premise 2: If it's possible that a maximally great Woo exists, then a maximally great psychiatrist exists in some possible ward.
Premise 3: If a maximally great psychiatrist exists in some possible ward, then you may exist in a very possible Psychiatry Ward.
Premise 4: If a maximally great psychiatrist exists in every possible ward, then you may exist in an actual Psychiatry Ward.
Premise 5: Therefore a maximally great Woo will exist in an actual Psychiatry Ward.
Premise 6: Therefore a maximally great straight jacket exists
Conclusion: Therefore padded cells exist.
Religion is the top shelf of the supernatural supermarket ... Madog
