RE: The Kalam Cosmological Argument
August 6, 2024 at 3:39 pm
(This post was last modified: August 6, 2024 at 3:43 pm by Mister Agenda.)
(August 4, 2024 at 2:17 pm)The Grand Nudger Wrote: In plantingas formulation there are, conceivably, all sorts of things a god can't do or can't know. I understand that in your (broadly..our) conception of omniscience and omnipotence any failure in any of these things would seem disqualifying - but that is a disagreement over definitions and not a logical fallacy - as you seem to have hit on.
Woudn't an argument have to be both valid and sound to be successful?
All cats are green, Smoky is a cat, therefore Smoky is green. Perfectly valid. I imagine the problem with Plantinga's argument is in the premises, like whether a possible world argument can get you to a real thing in the first place. I mean there are possible worlds where cucumbers taste like chocolate, or John Kerry became president in 2004, but I don't think there're any real world implications from that.
I'm not anti-Christian. I'm anti-stupid.