Total Posts:14|Showing Posts:1-14
Jump to topic:

Amusing Syllogism

abromwell
Posts: 2
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/29/2009 12:26:17 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
I just encountered this parody of the Ontological Argument, made me chuckle.

1. The creation of the universe is the most marvelous achievement imaginable.
2. The merit of an achievement is the product of (a) its intrinsic quality, and (b) the ability of its creator.
3. The greater the disability (or handicap) of the creator, the more impressive the achievement.
4. The most formidable handicap for a creator would be non-existence.
5. Therefore if we suppose that the universe is the product of an existent creator we can conceive a greater being — namely, one who created everything while not existing.
6. Therefore, God does not exist.
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/29/2009 12:31:03 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
Lol, amusing and logical, but that is assuming that, should a God exist, he has a handicap which makes the creation marvellous. However, anything which has the power to create the universe we know is formidable and beyond anything else.

Besides, non-existence isn't a handicap. A speech impediment is. Something must exist and have a state of comparability before it can have a handicap. It's like assuming a tortoise you see on a beach is slow because he is the only one you've seen. However, if you saw every tortoise in the world, you would realise that by nature, they are slow.
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/29/2009 12:40:20 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 7/29/2009 12:37:45 PM, mongeese wrote:
Yeah, the syllogism fails where the creation of the universe required the lack of such a handicap.

*Hi-Fives* ?
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.
abromwell
Posts: 2
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/29/2009 1:12:15 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
In essence, the argument is challenging the very idea of omnipotence, just as the classic question:

"Can god create a stone so massive even she cannot lift it?"

I think it's a refreshing perspective to challenge the notion of a god, as opposed to the probability of one.
beem0r
Posts: 1,155
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/29/2009 4:22:01 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 7/29/2009 12:26:17 PM, abromwell wrote:
I just encountered this parody of the Ontological Argument, made me chuckle.

1. The creation of the universe is the most marvelous achievement imaginable.
Bold assertion with no backing.

2. The merit of an achievement is the product of (a) its intrinsic quality, and (b) the ability of its creator.
Unfortunately, #1 seemingly only dealt with one of these two aspects of amazingness, the intrinsic quality of the thing. To get from "creating the universe was amazing" to "the creator must have been very disabled" is a bit ridiculous, no? #1 is certainly no basis for addressing the ability of the creator, except that if there was one, he had to at least be capable of creating the universe.

3. The greater the disability (or handicap) of the creator, the more impressive the achievement.
That's not how I'd define it, but I won't make a big deal out of that. I'll agree with yr definition.

4. The most formidable handicap for a creator would be non-existence.
Like someone else alredy said, that contradicts the fact that a supposed creator would have to exist in order to do anything. For the term "creator" to even refer to anything real, one must exist.

5. Therefore if we suppose that the universe is the product of an existent creator we can conceive a greater being — namely, one who created everything while not existing.
Okay. So? Does the fact that we can conceive of a "being" who is "greater" (by which you actually mean lesser, which by your definition makes the ACT greater) - does that logically show that that "greater" creator actually existed? No. It doesn't. It just means you can think of one that's "greater" than an existent creator.

6. Therefore, God does not exist.
For the reasons above, this is an invalid conclusion.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/29/2009 4:35:19 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
I'm far more impressed with the achievements of the able than the unable.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
regebro
Posts: 1,152
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/29/2009 6:17:58 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 7/29/2009 12:26:17 PM, abromwell wrote:
I just encountered this parody of the Ontological Argument, made me chuckle.

Parody? It is the ontological argument, just used to prove the exact opposite, and hence a marvellous example of what you can do if you pretend to be logical but break the rules of logic.

And therefore it is of course very funny. :) Just not a parody.
So prove me wrong, then.
JustCallMeTarzan
Posts: 1,922
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/29/2009 8:04:08 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
I'll go one further...

At 7/29/2009 4:22:01 PM, beem0r wrote:
At 7/29/2009 12:26:17 PM, abromwell wrote:

1. The creation of the universe is the most marvelous achievement imaginable.
Bold assertion with no backing.

Meh - jut false. Creation of multiple universes... that gets it going.

2. The merit of an achievement is the product of (a) its intrinsic quality, and (b) the ability of its creator.
Unfortunately, #1 seemingly only dealt with one of these two aspects of amazingness, the intrinsic quality of the thing. To get from "creating the universe was amazing" to "the creator must have been very disabled" is a bit ridiculous, no? #1 is certainly no basis for addressing the ability of the creator, except that if there was one, he had to at least be capable of creating the universe.

Missing (c) the response of the audience.

3. The greater the disability (or handicap) of the creator, the more impressive the achievement.
That's not how I'd define it, but I won't make a big deal out of that. I'll agree with yr definition.

Not very impressive to be handicapped in the first place.

4. The most formidable handicap for a creator would be non-existence.
Like someone else alredy said, that contradicts the fact that a supposed creator would have to exist in order to do anything. For the term "creator" to even refer to anything real, one must exist.

God vanishes in a poof of existential mist. We're done here.
regebro
Posts: 1,152
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/30/2009 3:30:47 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
Some comments:

1. The creation of the universe is the most marvelous achievement imaginable.

Multiple universes doesn't change this argument, you can just switch the word to "multiverse". It's obvious that the argument is talking about "the all". But that doesn't make the statement correct. Lets look at it:

"The creation"

Woups! Already here it assumes the universe was created. There is no reason to assume that. We know our part of the all was started with the big bang, but we don't know if that was a creation in the divine sense. That could just have been a side effect of something else.

"of the universe is the most marvelous"

Why? What's marvellous about it? What does marvellous even mean? Cool? Heavy? Difficult? Or does it mean "marvel" as in astonishment and surprise? Why would that be surprising. We are here, and we could not marvel at the universe unless it existed. It's completely unsurprising that it exists because if it didn't we couldn't be surprised.

"achievement imaginable."

Again, this presumes that there was somebody creating the universe. Without that presumption, it wasn't an achievement at all.

So, already in the first statement, we assume that a creator god exist, and created the universe, intentionally, and that this is surprising. What would be surprising with a creator god intentionally creating a universe is beyond me. Ah well.

2. The merit of an achievement is the product of (a) its intrinsic quality, and (b) the ability of its creator.

I don't agree at all. I would say that the merit of an achievement is the product of how difficult it was to do. Clearly a subjective question.

3. The greater the disability (or handicap) of the creator, the more impressive the achievement.

OK, so with marvellous evidently "impressive" was meant. That kinda ruins it, because they now say "The creation of the universe is the most impressive thing ever", which is much more obviously subjective. I may chose to get impressed by the stupidity of people. I do, quite often in fact. That's not exactly an achievement.

But yes, I agree than an achievement is more imprissive the more useless the person who makes the achievement.

4. The most formidable handicap for a creator would be non-existence.

Non-sensical. A non-existant entity can not exist.

5. Therefore if we suppose that the universe is the product of an existent creator we can conceive a greater being — namely, one who created everything while not existing.

Here they have a point. If the existance of the universe because it was created by a creator god is impressive/surprising, then obviously it's even more impressive/surprisinging that it exists without a creator god. Well, at least surprising. :)

6. Therefore, God does not exist.

If 1 is true, and 5 is true, then 6 is true, if we with marvellous mean "surprising". But, as shown, 1 is false, and they didn't really mean surprising.
So prove me wrong, then.
studentathletechristian8
Posts: 5,810
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/3/2009 8:11:00 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 7/30/2009 3:30:47 AM, regebro wrote:
Some comments:

1. The creation of the universe is the most marvelous achievement imaginable.

Multiple universes doesn't change this argument, you can just switch the word to "multiverse". It's obvious that the argument is talking about "the all". But that doesn't make the statement correct. Lets look at it:

"The creation"

Woups! Already here it assumes the universe was created. There is no reason to assume that. We know our part of the all was started with the big bang, but we don't know if that was a creation in the divine sense. That could just have been a side effect of something else.

"of the universe is the most marvelous"

Why? What's marvellous about it? What does marvellous even mean? Cool? Heavy? Difficult? Or does it mean "marvel" as in astonishment and surprise? Why would that be surprising. We are here, and we could not marvel at the universe unless it existed. It's completely unsurprising that it exists because if it didn't we couldn't be surprised.

"achievement imaginable."

Again, this presumes that there was somebody creating the universe. Without that presumption, it wasn't an achievement at all.

So, already in the first statement, we assume that a creator god exist, and created the universe, intentionally, and that this is surprising. What would be surprising with a creator god intentionally creating a universe is beyond me. Ah well.

2. The merit of an achievement is the product of (a) its intrinsic quality, and (b) the ability of its creator.

I don't agree at all. I would say that the merit of an achievement is the product of how difficult it was to do. Clearly a subjective question.

3. The greater the disability (or handicap) of the creator, the more impressive the achievement.

OK, so with marvellous evidently "impressive" was meant. That kinda ruins it, because they now say "The creation of the universe is the most impressive thing ever", which is much more obviously subjective. I may chose to get impressed by the stupidity of people. I do, quite often in fact. That's not exactly an achievement.

But yes, I agree than an achievement is more imprissive the more useless the person who makes the achievement.

4. The most formidable handicap for a creator would be non-existence.

Non-sensical. A non-existant entity can not exist.

5. Therefore if we suppose that the universe is the product of an existent creator we can conceive a greater being — namely, one who created everything while not existing.

Here they have a point. If the existance of the universe because it was created by a creator god is impressive/surprising, then obviously it's even more impressive/surprisinging that it exists without a creator god. Well, at least surprising. :)

6. Therefore, God does not exist.

If 1 is true, and 5 is true, then 6 is true, if we with marvellous mean "surprising". But, as shown, 1 is false, and they didn't really mean surprising.

This entire syllogism is false. God does exist. I don't know why all the atheists on this website bring up the "non-existance" of God in almost all the religion forums.
And to that dumb thing about God creating a stone too powerful for him to lift: since God is obviously omnipotent, He can, however, He still has the ability to erase the stone like it never existed. GOD= Giving Omnipotent Durable
regebro
Posts: 1,152
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/3/2009 9:04:17 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 8/3/2009 8:11:00 AM, studentathletechristian8 wrote:
This entire syllogism is false. God does exist.

You really didn't understand a word I said, did you? :

And to that dumb thing about God creating a stone too powerful for him to lift: since God is obviously omnipotent, He can, however, He still has the ability to erase the stone like it never existed. GOD= Giving Omnipotent Durable

You completely missed the point about that too. The point is that God, being omnipotent, can lift stones he can't lift.
So prove me wrong, then.
DATCMOTO
Posts: 6,160
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/4/2009 12:22:21 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 7/29/2009 12:26:17 PM, abromwell wrote:
I just encountered this parody of the Ontological Argument, made me chuckle.

1. The creation of the universe is the most marvelous achievement imaginable.
2. The merit of an achievement is the product of (a) its intrinsic quality, and (b) the ability of its creator.
3. The greater the disability (or handicap) of the creator, the more impressive the achievement.
4. The most formidable handicap for a creator would be non-existence.
5. Therefore if we suppose that the universe is the product of an existent creator we can conceive a greater being — namely, one who created everything while not existing.
6. Therefore, God does not exist.

Although not as impressive as that Creator giving said creation the option of rejecting Him and THEN entering that rejection AND paying the price of said rejection: the cross is to them that perish FOOLISHNESS; but to us which are SAVED it is the POWER OF GOD!
The Cross.. the Cross.