RE: Very short version of the long argument.
September 11, 2017 at 9:26 am
(This post was last modified: September 11, 2017 at 9:27 am by Edwardo Piet.)
(September 11, 2017 at 8:17 am)MysticKnight Wrote: If we know to some degree something about the highest possible goodness there is a connection to it.
Do you mean a connection between the knower and the known?
If so, so what? You next have to prove that we do know something about the highest possible goodness.
Quote:If there is a connection to it, it exists.
See above.
Quote:We do know something about the highest possible goodness.
You need to actually make an argument for this. See above.
Quote:Therefore there is a connection it.
Therefore it exists.
Seeing a theme yet? You merely assume we know such a thing and give no argument for it whatsoever.
Quote:
The disputable premise might be we know something about it but even atheists argue that God who allows suffering without benign purpose cannot be ultimate good. And they argue by some knowledge of the ultimate good to assert it cannot exist. At the end, no true knowledge of a transcendent goodness beyond our limits can be know without a connection! And if there is a connection than just as we exist on one hand what we are connected to exists as well!
I believe some things are ultimately good, but merely labelling that "God" hasn't proved anything.
Let's say we assumed the premise that you've given no argument for is true. You have still only made an argument for ultimate goodness and you haven't made any argument for God. If you are merely going to label ultimate goodness with the word "God" then what you've got there is ultimate goodness that you like to use the word "God" for. Which is a form of weak pantheism at best.
To actually prove that such ultimate goodness was God, you'd have to also prove that such ultimate goodness 1. Has a mind. 2. Created the universe. 3. Is omniscient. 4. Is omnipotent. 5. Is omnipresent. 6. Has other qualities God supposedly has.
Quote:If you wish to see elaboration to each premise, see the long but worth it thread.
If you wish to see a rebuttal of those premises: see my responses where I point out how you failed to be relevant to the argument you claimed to be making.
