RE: Why ontological arguments are illogical
August 3, 2012 at 10:19 am
(This post was last modified: August 3, 2012 at 10:20 am by Whateverist.)
(August 2, 2012 at 10:53 pm)CliveStaples Wrote: Most ontological arguments define 'God' to be 'that which is the most perfect thing', or 'that which possesses all perfections', or something of the like. Are you claiming that the most perfect thing is not perfect?
Beware illusions of language. Just because you can formulate a sentence like "God is the most perfect thing" doesn't make it meaningful. Is that supposed to mean that God can be played to better effect than a Stradiverius violin? Does God have the best hair ever? Does He simultaneously have the shiniest bald pate? Is God the best temperature for a bath or the best temperature for a martini?
Perfect as an adjective must be in regards to something or other. What determines the categories for which God is the best, especially given that some categories are mutually exclusive?