(June 21, 2016 at 3:45 pm)Esquilax Wrote:(June 21, 2016 at 2:59 pm)LastPoet Wrote: The KCA, the Ontological Argument, TAG, are all desperate attempts to argue god into existence. They might persuade those that already want to believe or those not very well versed in logic or unable to comprehend what's being said. Not those with more training and ability to think.
That's sort of the thing I've been alluding to from the beginning that, curiously, continues to be ignored by the proponents of the argument: you can't talk a thing into existence. Logical arguments made in the absence of objective observations might work within the self-contained world of the argument, but there's nothing to bridge that hypothetical into the world we actually live in. A valid argument- which the ontological argument is not, but hey- can still be an untrue argument if the premises don't align with the world itself.
You'd think it'd be a red flag when most, if not all, logical arguments for the existence of "God" essentially boil down to "God must exist, otherwise this argument doesn't work".
At the age of five, Skagra decided emphatically that God did not exist. This revelation tends to make most people in the universe who have it react in one of two ways - with relief or with despair. Only Skagra responded to it by thinking, 'Wait a second. That means there's a situation vacant.'
