RE: What do you think of this argument for God?
March 4, 2017 at 4:14 am
(This post was last modified: March 4, 2017 at 4:22 am by ErGingerbreadMandude.)
(March 4, 2017 at 4:05 am)Jesster Wrote: Yeah, I've heard this one before. I don't accept the first two premises to be true. The third premise is a guess that God exists in any possible world in the first place, so I can't accept that to be true either.
For the sake of the argument, it does depend on what God you're talking about.
As for the argument:
TheAtheologian Wrote:1. God is the greatest possible being.
2. God is a necessary being, which means that God exists in every possible world (If God exists).
3. If God exists in one possible world, God must logically exist in every possible world.
4. Since God is the greatest possible being, it follows that every aspect of God (being possible) exists in some possible world.
5. Therefore, God exists (in all possible worlds, including ours).
I actually just structured the premises this way myself but is the same idea as an argument I heard before.
Number 5 is a wrong conclusion. You say in number 4 that every aspect of God being possible exists in some possible world. Suppose a God is characterized by some religion as someone that can levitate. According to what you say in number 4 only the possible attributes of the God can exist, since the ability to levitate is an impossible attribute in a possible world it follows that "God" doesn't exist in a possible world, ie, is non-existent.
