RE: Christians, what is your VERY BEST arguments for the existence of God?
February 12, 2010 at 3:32 pm
(February 12, 2010 at 3:13 pm)BioLogos Wrote: What is the original you were parodying? Since the modern forms of the argument involve modal logic, I would expect the parody to do the same... Plus the most obvious reason that your parody fails is because it involves a "non-existent creator" which is a logically incoherent notion.Go back and read my post. The parody is included, and I made sure to mention it was a parody. Criticising my post as "not a serious response" is only valid if you thought I was using the parody as some kind of proof of the non-existence of God. I didn't.
The most obvious reason the parody fails is because it uses the same logic as the ontological argument. It seeks to define God out of existence in the same way the ontological argument seeks to define God into existence.
Quote:It is not S5 that is the issue, but the possibility premise (P). Plantinga thinks the argument is good against those who think P is plausible. I couldn't see how your other points were relevant to the modal argument - could you be more specific?I never said it was S5 that was the issue, S5 leads to the possibility premise, which is the problem as you said. As I already said, the "proof" doesn't do anything. It just concludes that "either God exists or he doesn't". I could have told you that without coming up with a 6 stage modal proof.