Well, haven taken a cursory glance at the use of these silly operators (I've worked with necessary and sufficient, but possible is in the realm of silly), I have figured out that the second premise is malarky. In layman's terms, it says: If x is not necessarily possible than not possible x. (I realize it sounds kind of retarded, but not possible x is different than x is not possible, though it is essentially the same in this case.)
Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: November 25, 2024, 5:12 pm
Thread Rating:
Plantiga's ontological argument.
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)