RE: The Modal Ontological Argument - Without Modal Logic
February 14, 2014 at 2:10 am
(This post was last modified: February 14, 2014 at 2:15 am by Rational AKD.)
(February 14, 2014 at 1:55 am)Darkstar Wrote: I mean like them holding each other in check. If unicorns don't exist, they continue to not exist. If they do, they continue to exist. But...that would still mean there would be something they could not do, so...yes, it would involve one will overpowering the other. it's like considering what happens when an unstoppable force meets an immovable object.
Quote:heard Christians claim that god created the laws of logic. If so (you can still reply that he didn't), why would he be bound by them?I don't claim he created the laws of logic. I hold the idea that the laws of logic are necessarily a part of God himself. the laws have always existed with God in eternity.
Quote:Also, how do you know a non-physical being is invulnerable for certain?I don't think a non-physical being is invulnerable for certain, but it is certainly possible. on the other hand a physical being is vulnerable, so God can't be physical. because a non-physical being can be invulnerable, there is no contradiction in terms of a non-physical invulnerable being. since there is no contradiction in terms, God is conceivable... and the argument takes over.
(February 14, 2014 at 2:06 am)Darkstar Wrote: Interesting concept. It doesn't seem like something that could ever be proven or disproven, though. Kind of like a more extreme version of the Brain in a vat concept.I will post some evidence in the future in support of this concept. you may have heard of it before as "The Introspective Argument."
I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with senses, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use and by some other means to give us knowledge which we can attain by them.
-Galileo
-Galileo
