Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: January 30, 2025, 2:51 pm

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
The Ontological Argument - valid or debunked?
RE: The Ontological Argument - valid or debunked?
(June 18, 2016 at 3:26 pm)Veritas_Vincit Wrote: This is the syllogism in Craig's words verbatim from this video:

Premise 1: It's possible that a 'maximally great being' exists. 
Premise 2: If it's possible that a maximally great being exists, then a maximally great being exists in some possible world.
Premise 3: If a maximally great being exists in some possible world, then it exists in every possible world. 
Premise 4: If a maximally great being exists in every possible world, then it exists in the actual world. 
Premise 5: Therefore a maximally great being exists in the actual world.
Premise 6: Therefore a maximally great being exists
Conclusion: Therefore God exists. 

@SteveII:
The argument assumes that a maximally great being would possess the property of necessarily existing.  If the greatness of a property is subjective, then it's not objectively true that a maximally great being would have the property of existing necessarily.  Premise 3 actually states that a maximally great being would exist necessarily.  Since it's not objectively true that maximal greatness includes necessarily existing, this premise is false, and the proof is unsound.  The only way around this objection is to show that necessarily existing is objectively great, and this you cannot do, for as explained the notion of objective greatness is incoherent.



One can show the absurdity of the argument by proposing an equally valid reductio in which one postulates a maximally evil being who is omnipotent, omniscient, and wholly evil as done in the following video.

Premise 1: It's possible that a 'maximally evil being' exists.
Premise 2: If it's possible that a maximally evil being exists, then a maximally evil being exists in some possible world.
Premise 3: If a maximally evil being exists in some possible world, then it exists in every possible world.
Premise 4: If a maximally evil being exists in every possible world, then it exists in the actual world.
Premise 5: Therefore a maximally evil being exists in the actual world.
Premise 6: Therefore a maximally evil being exists.
Conclusion: Therefore a maximally evil being exists.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YbRSGYRQqic

All that we are doing is arbitrarily picking a set of attributes and attaching the necessarily existing tag to them. This is no proof that a necessary being exists, whether possibly or actually.
[Image: extraordinarywoo-sig.jpg]
Reply



Messages In This Thread
RE: The Ontological Argument - valid or debunked? - by Angrboda - June 21, 2016 at 6:18 pm

Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  The Ontological Argument for the Existence of God athrock 429 92286 March 14, 2016 at 2:22 am
Last Post: robvalue
  Why theists think their irrational/fallacious beliefs are valid Silver 26 7295 May 1, 2014 at 6:38 pm
Last Post: Neo-Scholastic



Users browsing this thread: 5 Guest(s)