RE: The Kalam Cosmological Argument
August 4, 2024 at 11:11 am
(This post was last modified: August 4, 2024 at 11:17 am by The Grand Nudger.)
You misunderstand. That is the s5 theory undergirding a whole family of modal logic. We can be skeptical or critical of logical systems in general or in particular as they all make axiomatic assertions- but that's not something specific to plantingas argument. We accept the validity of modal logic in a broad category of other assertions - and this is all that's required for an argument to be successful in a technical sense. That it meets the criteria of the logical system it's premised on - which is generally accepted..or, to put it in more neutral terms - is not obviously wrong-.
Classical arguments for gods failed at this as a matter of historical interest- thus the continuing search for a better version. FWIW, those classical arguments could or would have often been seen as successful in their own time - because logic as we have it did not spring forth all at once or from the mind of a particular person in a specific time. We have learned over deep human time that the sorts of inferences we once found compelling were flawed in any number of ways and so the "rules of logic" have changed to suit (there are also other forms of logic entirely - as in other than the contemporary western types we often employ here). It may be the case that this is the eventual fate of modal logic in general or it's application to a specific subject in particular.
Classical arguments for gods failed at this as a matter of historical interest- thus the continuing search for a better version. FWIW, those classical arguments could or would have often been seen as successful in their own time - because logic as we have it did not spring forth all at once or from the mind of a particular person in a specific time. We have learned over deep human time that the sorts of inferences we once found compelling were flawed in any number of ways and so the "rules of logic" have changed to suit (there are also other forms of logic entirely - as in other than the contemporary western types we often employ here). It may be the case that this is the eventual fate of modal logic in general or it's application to a specific subject in particular.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
