(May 16, 2023 at 9:55 pm)Neo-Scholastic Wrote:(May 16, 2023 at 6:52 pm)Belacqua Wrote: Theologians would say that it's valid but not sound.
That is, given the premisses as written, the logic works -- therefore it's valid. However theologians don't agree that God is "an existent entity." So for them it's not a sound argument.
Fair enough, however. One definition of God is Necessary Being. Therefor the answer to the question of why there is something rather than nothing starts to sound tautalogical, a point @emjay makes. To me this is not an insurmountable objection. Because the something in question is not simply nothing but also (apparently) not everything that could be. In other words, we have to ground the particularity of this reality on transcendent universals...eternity in a wildflower.
It's an interesting thought, I think the first time I've personally seen anyone address this. It's something I'll have to ponder.
