RE: The modal ontological argument for God
August 6, 2024 at 12:17 pm
(This post was last modified: August 6, 2024 at 12:18 pm by Sheldon.)
(August 6, 2024 at 10:59 am)The Grand Nudger Wrote: Is the unicorn a necessary being? Then the argument works the same way. Is it not? Then the s5 theory of modal logic does not apply.Yes, sorry that was my point, if we accept that X is possible then the argument works, no matter what X is.
Quote:If an x is possibly necessary in any possible world..and the s5 theory of modal logic is true/applicable/informative...then the statement "x exists" is true in all possible worlds.This of course then requires that first step, that someone believe X is possible, which explains why apologists so often are amazed when I don't accept the conclusion of the argument, it's because I would first need to believe a deity is possible.
Quote:Plantinga would agree with the essence of your remarks, though, in that no one thinks the argument is compelling to anyone who doesn't already believe in gods.They shouldn't, but I have encountered people who do seem genuinely surprised I remain unconvinced a deity exists.
