Total Posts:37|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Most convincing arguments for God

thett3
Posts: 14,378
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/11/2012 10:51:39 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
What, in your opinions are the most compelling theistic arguments? Everyone is welcome to answer
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
THEBOMB
Posts: 2,872
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/11/2012 10:55:09 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/11/2012 10:51:39 PM, thett3 wrote:
What, in your opinions are the most compelling theistic arguments? Everyone is welcome to answer

Are you talking personal arguments (that you make to yourself) or arguments you make to a skeptic?
thett3
Posts: 14,378
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/11/2012 10:56:23 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/11/2012 10:55:09 PM, THEBOMB wrote:
At 10/11/2012 10:51:39 PM, thett3 wrote:
What, in your opinions are the most compelling theistic arguments? Everyone is welcome to answer

Are you talking personal arguments (that you make to yourself) or arguments you make to a skeptic?

Either way, I'm just looking for peoples thoughts in it
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
philochristos
Posts: 2,614
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/11/2012 11:52:51 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
For me it's the cosmological argument and the moral argument, although I don't find the cosmological argument as convincing as I used to.
"Not to know of what things one should demand demonstration, and of what one should not, argues want of education." ~Aristotle

"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." ~Aristotle
emospongebob527
Posts: 790
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2012 12:03:17 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
What arguments? The unreasonable ones? Lol just kidding ;)
"not to toot my own horn (it aint need no tooin if u know what im saying), but my writings on "viciousness: the one true viture (fancy spelling for virtue)" and my poem "A poem I wrote about DDO" put me in a class of my damn own. im just an UNRECONGIZED geniuse" -bananafana
truthseeker613
Posts: 464
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2012 12:57:16 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
It's hard to pick one. Here are some arguments I find convincing:

Top 10:

1)cosmological

2)Existence & survival of Israel and the Jewish People
http://israelinsider.net...
http://www.patrobertson.com...
http://www.simpletoremember.com...

3)kuzari argument
http://ohr.edu...
http://plato.stanford.edu...
extremegharchive.blogspot.com/2006/09/kuzari-proof-it-works.html

4)The argument from reason
http://en.wikipedia.org...

5) transcendental argument - suggests that logic, science, ethics, and other serious matters do not make sense in the absence of God, and that atheistic arguments must ultimately refute themselves if pressed with rigorous consistency

6)Qualia-based arguments - consciousness

7)teleological argument

8)Arguments that a non-physical quality observed in the universe is of fundamental importance and not an epiphenomenon, such as Morality (Argument from morality), Beauty (Argument from beauty), Love (Argument from love), or religious experience (Argument from religious experience), are arguments for theism as against materialism.

9) Pascal's wager - not a proof but a very solid reason.

10) meaning in life/ existence - without god there is no meaning/ purpose in life/ existence.
http://www.nydailynews.com...

royalpaladin: I'd rather support people who kill spies than a nation that organizes assassination squads (Kidon) to illegally enter into other nations and kill anybody who is not a Zionist. Who knows when they'll kill me for the crime of not supporting Israel?

Koopin: LOL! I just imagine Royal sitting in here apartment at night, when suddenly she hears a man outside speaking Hebrew as sh
themuzicman
Posts: 3
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2012 9:21:10 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
If someone claims to be God, says that they're going to be put to death, be dead for three days, and then is resurrected, and has both public historical writings and an organization dedicated to bearing witness to it, then I think He's proven His claim.
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2012 9:28:41 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/12/2012 12:57:16 PM, truthseeker613 wrote:
It's hard to pick one. Here are some arguments I find convincing:

Top 10:

1)cosmological

2)Existence & survival of Israel and the Jewish People
http://israelinsider.net...
http://www.patrobertson.com...
http://www.simpletoremember.com...

3)kuzari argument
http://ohr.edu...
http://plato.stanford.edu...
extremegharchive.blogspot.com/2006/09/kuzari-proof-it-works.html

4)The argument from reason
http://en.wikipedia.org...

5) transcendental argument - suggests that logic, science, ethics, and other serious matters do not make sense in the absence of God, and that atheistic arguments must ultimately refute themselves if pressed with rigorous consistency

6)Qualia-based arguments - consciousness

7)teleological argument

8)Arguments that a non-physical quality observed in the universe is of fundamental importance and not an epiphenomenon, such as Morality (Argument from morality), Beauty (Argument from beauty), Love (Argument from love), or religious experience (Argument from religious experience), are arguments for theism as against materialism.

9) Pascal's wager - not a proof but a very solid reason.

10) meaning in life/ existence - without god there is no meaning/ purpose in life/ existence.

I'm laughing with God at your arguments.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2012 9:29:52 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
The best one that I've heard is that without God, everybody will be a big meanie-bo-beanie and go out and massacre people over who is the least religious and who has the rights to the homeland of atheism.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
phantom
Posts: 6,774
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2012 9:58:37 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Maybe the teleological argument pertaining to physics (not biological). Even Dawkins admits science hasn't found a thorough answer to it yet and it convinced Flew. Argument from consciousness and various ones from reason. Transcendental. Various cosmological arguments. Ontological can be a little tricky but I've never agreed with it.

I don't find any very convincing any more though.
"Music is a zen-like ecstatic state where you become the new man of the future, the Nietzschean merger of Apollo and Dionysus." Ray Manzarek (The Doors)
phantom
Posts: 6,774
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2012 10:04:34 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/12/2012 12:57:16 PM, truthseeker613 wrote:

10) meaning in life/ existence - without god there is no meaning/ purpose in life/ existence.

That's why there is no meaning/ purpose in life/existence.
"Music is a zen-like ecstatic state where you become the new man of the future, the Nietzschean merger of Apollo and Dionysus." Ray Manzarek (The Doors)
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/13/2012 12:32:55 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/12/2012 9:24:33 PM, stubs wrote:
ontological

Seriously? would say that's like the least convincing argument for God's existence, next to the TAG argument.
CrazyPerson
Posts: 1,114
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/13/2012 1:08:03 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/11/2012 10:51:39 PM, thett3 wrote:
What, in your opinions are the most compelling theistic arguments? Everyone is welcome to answer

Assuming intellect = knowledge + intuition:

I know where knowledge comes from, and I don't know where intuition comes from. So it must be God.

sarcasm
But we try to pretend, you see, that the external world exists altogether independently of us.
- - - Watts
The moralist is the person who tells people that they ought to be unselfish, when they still feel like egos, and his efforts are always and invariably futile.
- - - Watts
Clash
Posts: 220
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/13/2012 2:20:24 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
In my opinion, the KCA is definitely the most convincing argument for God, alongside the arguments for Islam and the Quran being from God.
baggins
Posts: 855
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/13/2012 2:34:01 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/11/2012 10:51:39 PM, thett3 wrote:
What, in your opinions are the most compelling theistic arguments? Everyone is welcome to answer

If God has created the world, and God wants us to follow a particular path - then it can be expected that God would leave some guidance for us. Existence of such guidance would be irrefutable evidence for existence of God.

The most convincing argument for God comes from reading The Holy Quran.
The Holy Quran 29:19-20

See they not how Allah originates creation, then repeats it: truly that is easy for Allah.

Say: "Travel through the earth and see how Allah did originate creation; so will Allah produce a later creation: for Allah has power over all things.
stubs
Posts: 1,887
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/13/2012 6:57:11 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/13/2012 12:32:55 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 10/12/2012 9:24:33 PM, stubs wrote:
ontological

Seriously? would say that's like the least convincing argument for God's existence, next to the TAG argument.

If you get the time could you explain your refutation of it?
truthseeker613
Posts: 464
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/13/2012 10:21:17 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/12/2012 10:04:34 PM, phantom wrote:
At 10/12/2012 12:57:16 PM, truthseeker613 wrote:

10) meaning in life/ existence - without god there is no meaning/ purpose in life/ existence.

That's why there is no meaning/ purpose in life/existence.

How can you live with that?
http://www.nydailynews.com...

royalpaladin: I'd rather support people who kill spies than a nation that organizes assassination squads (Kidon) to illegally enter into other nations and kill anybody who is not a Zionist. Who knows when they'll kill me for the crime of not supporting Israel?

Koopin: LOL! I just imagine Royal sitting in here apartment at night, when suddenly she hears a man outside speaking Hebrew as sh
Composer
Posts: 5,858
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/13/2012 10:59:37 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/12/2012 9:21:10 PM, themuzicman wrote:
If someone claims to be God, says that they're going to be put to death, be dead for three days, and then is resurrected, and has both public historical writings and an organization dedicated to bearing witness to it, then I think He's proven His claim.

Me Composer the ongoing successful Cult buster: Only happened in a groups preferred Story book; based upon 100% human invention & hearsay regarding a Historical Myth and the human invented organisations that proliferated on their various conclusions and personal preferences regarding this & other Mythical characters! (e.g. Moses, Apostles & Paul)
Composer
Posts: 5,858
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/13/2012 11:04:04 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/13/2012 2:34:01 PM, baggins wrote:
At 10/11/2012 10:51:39 PM, thett3 wrote:
What, in your opinions are the most compelling theistic arguments? Everyone is welcome to answer

If God has created the world, and God wants us to follow a particular path - then it can be expected that God would leave some guidance for us. Existence of such guidance would be irrefutable evidence for existence of God.

The most convincing argument for God comes from reading The Holy Quran.

Me Composer the ongoing successful Cult buster: Could you clarify that the Qur'an was compiled and written by writers allegedly recording what they claimed the uneducated and illiterate Mohammed allegedly told them = hearsay!
muzebreak
Posts: 2,781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/14/2012 6:26:27 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/13/2012 6:57:11 PM, stubs wrote:
At 10/13/2012 12:32:55 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 10/12/2012 9:24:33 PM, stubs wrote:
ontological

Seriously? would say that's like the least convincing argument for God's existence, next to the TAG argument.

If you get the time could you explain your refutation of it?

Heres a refutation of ontological if you want it: Imagine a perfect ham sandwich, it perfectly corresponds to all your tastes, it is perfectly big enough to be finished when you don't want anymore, it is perfect in every way, and that perfection includes existence. So does my ham sandwich exist? And how about every perfect thing ever conceived? And what if I start adding certain qualities to what I would consider perfection? For instance, my perfect woman would be doing nasty things with me right now, as this would be perfect in my opinion, and yet as we both know I'm typing a response to your question. And lets not even get into who's perfect being would exist.

Imagining something perfect does not give said thing the quality of existence, it just means you imagine it having the quality of existence, or else I would be doing nasty things instead of intellectual ones right now.
"Every kid starts out as a natural-born scientist, and then we beat it out of them. A few trickle through the system with their wonder and enthusiasm for science intact." - Carl Sagan

This is the response of the defenders of Sparta to the Commander of the Roman Army: "If you are a god, you will not hurt those who have never injured you. If you are a man, advance - you will find men equal to yourself. And women.
Smithereens
Posts: 5,512
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/14/2012 6:33:09 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/14/2012 6:26:27 AM, muzebreak wrote:
At 10/13/2012 6:57:11 PM, stubs wrote:
At 10/13/2012 12:32:55 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 10/12/2012 9:24:33 PM, stubs wrote:
ontological

Seriously? would say that's like the least convincing argument for God's existence, next to the TAG argument.

If you get the time could you explain your refutation of it?

Heres a refutation of ontological if you want it: Imagine a perfect ham sandwich, it perfectly corresponds to all your tastes, it is perfectly big enough to be finished when you don't want anymore, it is perfect in every way, and that perfection includes existence. So does my ham sandwich exist? And how about every perfect thing ever conceived? And what if I start adding certain qualities to what I would consider perfection? For instance, my perfect woman would be doing nasty things with me right now, as this would be perfect in my opinion, and yet as we both know I'm typing a response to your question. And lets not even get into who's perfect being would exist.

Imagining something perfect does not give said thing the quality of existence, it just means you imagine it having the quality of existence, or else I would be doing nasty things instead of intellectual ones right now.

read this, the rebuttal to the standard rebuttal of the ontological argument is at the bottom. http://www.angelfire.com...
Music composition contest: http://www.debate.org...
muzebreak
Posts: 2,781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/14/2012 6:47:36 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/12/2012 12:57:16 PM, truthseeker613 wrote:
It's hard to pick one. Here are some arguments I find convincing:

Top 10:

1)cosmological

Logical and scientifically un-sound


2)Existence & survival of Israel and the Jewish People
http://israelinsider.net...
http://www.patrobertson.com...
http://www.simpletoremember.com...

Does not go towards proving any god.


3)kuzari argument
http://ohr.edu...
http://plato.stanford.edu...
extremegharchive.blogspot.com/2006/09/kuzari-proof-it-works.html

Does not prove a god, and most historians would disagree that it even proves the existence of the supposed 3 million jews who were at Mt. sinai.


4)The argument from reason
http://en.wikipedia.org...

This argument is guilty of begging the question, in that is assumes the truth of itself to make the second contention.


5) transcendental argument - suggests that logic, science, ethics, and other serious matters do not make sense in the absence of God, and that atheistic arguments must ultimately refute themselves if pressed with rigorous consistency

It assumes that the laws of logic are prescriptive and not descriptive.


6)Qualia-based arguments - consciousness

I'm unable to find a argument for god based on qualia.


7)teleological argument

Even if this argument worked it wouldn't prove a god, just a designer of some kind.


8)Arguments that a non-physical quality observed in the universe is of fundamental importance and not an epiphenomenon, such as Morality (Argument from morality), Beauty (Argument from beauty), Love (Argument from love), or religious experience (Argument from religious experience), are arguments for theism as against materialism.

Assumes the existence of non-physical qualities.


9) Pascal's wager - not a proof but a very solid reason.

Which god concept are you wagering on of the thousands that exist?


10) meaning in life/ existence - without god there is no meaning/ purpose in life/ existence.

Well, first off, this is in no way a proof of god. It is also completely incorrect. For instance, from a evolutionary perspective the purpose of life is to produce life. From my perspective, the purpose of life is to live. Life can have whatever purpose you give it.
"Every kid starts out as a natural-born scientist, and then we beat it out of them. A few trickle through the system with their wonder and enthusiasm for science intact." - Carl Sagan

This is the response of the defenders of Sparta to the Commander of the Roman Army: "If you are a god, you will not hurt those who have never injured you. If you are a man, advance - you will find men equal to yourself. And women.
muzebreak
Posts: 2,781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/14/2012 7:04:52 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/14/2012 6:33:09 AM, Smithereens wrote:
At 10/14/2012 6:26:27 AM, muzebreak wrote:
At 10/13/2012 6:57:11 PM, stubs wrote:
At 10/13/2012 12:32:55 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 10/12/2012 9:24:33 PM, stubs wrote:
ontological

Seriously? would say that's like the least convincing argument for God's existence, next to the TAG argument.

If you get the time could you explain your refutation of it?

Heres a refutation of ontological if you want it: Imagine a perfect ham sandwich, it perfectly corresponds to all your tastes, it is perfectly big enough to be finished when you don't want anymore, it is perfect in every way, and that perfection includes existence. So does my ham sandwich exist? And how about every perfect thing ever conceived? And what if I start adding certain qualities to what I would consider perfection? For instance, my perfect woman would be doing nasty things with me right now, as this would be perfect in my opinion, and yet as we both know I'm typing a response to your question. And lets not even get into who's perfect being would exist.

Imagining something perfect does not give said thing the quality of existence, it just means you imagine it having the quality of existence, or else I would be doing nasty things instead of intellectual ones right now.

read this, the rebuttal to the standard rebuttal of the ontological argument is at the bottom. http://www.angelfire.com...

It provides no evidence that it is possible for a god to exist, though it does do something. It defines god as the greatest possible being, and is therefore guilty of begging the question since it use's this definition of it being possible to prove that a god is possible. Saying something is the greatest possible being does not tell you how great a being can be. I say that the greatest possible being is me, and you cannot disprove this notion unless you provide a objective way of discerning what is the greatest.

As we know it, greatness is subjective and as such we cannot determine a greatest possible being beyond that which we as individuals would term the greatest. So, who's greatest possible being exists?
"Every kid starts out as a natural-born scientist, and then we beat it out of them. A few trickle through the system with their wonder and enthusiasm for science intact." - Carl Sagan

This is the response of the defenders of Sparta to the Commander of the Roman Army: "If you are a god, you will not hurt those who have never injured you. If you are a man, advance - you will find men equal to yourself. And women.
stubs
Posts: 1,887
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/14/2012 12:04:22 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/14/2012 6:26:27 AM, muzebreak wrote:
At 10/13/2012 6:57:11 PM, stubs wrote:
At 10/13/2012 12:32:55 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 10/12/2012 9:24:33 PM, stubs wrote:
ontological

Seriously? would say that's like the least convincing argument for God's existence, next to the TAG argument.

If you get the time could you explain your refutation of it?

Heres a refutation of ontological if you want it: Imagine a perfect ham sandwich, it perfectly corresponds to all your tastes, it is perfectly big enough to be finished when you don't want anymore, it is perfect in every way, and that perfection includes existence. So does my ham sandwich exist? And how about every perfect thing ever conceived? And what if I start adding certain qualities to what I would consider perfection? For instance, my perfect woman would be doing nasty things with me right now, as this would be perfect in my opinion, and yet as we both know I'm typing a response to your question. And lets not even get into who's perfect being would exist.

Imagining something perfect does not give said thing the quality of existence, it just means you imagine it having the quality of existence, or else I would be doing nasty things instead of intellectual ones right now.

A maximally great ham sandwich is logically incoherent. A maximally great sandwich would have to be metaphysically necessary, in order to be maximally great and yet able to be eaten in order to be a sandwich. It is simply a logically incoherent idea and exists in no possible world.
phantom
Posts: 6,774
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/14/2012 12:30:57 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/13/2012 10:21:17 PM, truthseeker613 wrote:
At 10/12/2012 10:04:34 PM, phantom wrote:
At 10/12/2012 12:57:16 PM, truthseeker613 wrote:

10) meaning in life/ existence - without god there is no meaning/ purpose in life/ existence.

That's why there is no meaning/ purpose in life/existence.

How can you live with that?

Uh, why do you ask? It doesn't change anything in regards to truth that life is depressing.
"Music is a zen-like ecstatic state where you become the new man of the future, the Nietzschean merger of Apollo and Dionysus." Ray Manzarek (The Doors)
phantom
Posts: 6,774
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/14/2012 12:32:28 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/14/2012 6:26:27 AM, muzebreak wrote:
At 10/13/2012 6:57:11 PM, stubs wrote:
At 10/13/2012 12:32:55 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 10/12/2012 9:24:33 PM, stubs wrote:
ontological

Seriously? would say that's like the least convincing argument for God's existence, next to the TAG argument.

If you get the time could you explain your refutation of it?

Heres a refutation of ontological if you want it: Imagine a perfect ham sandwich, it perfectly corresponds to all your tastes, it is perfectly big enough to be finished when you don't want anymore, it is perfect in every way, and that perfection includes existence. So does my ham sandwich exist? And how about every perfect thing ever conceived? And what if I start adding certain qualities to what I would consider perfection? For instance, my perfect woman would be doing nasty things with me right now, as this would be perfect in my opinion, and yet as we both know I'm typing a response to your question. And lets not even get into who's perfect being would exist.

Imagining something perfect does not give said thing the quality of existence, it just means you imagine it having the quality of existence, or else I would be doing nasty things instead of intellectual ones right now.

Subjective properties brah.
"Music is a zen-like ecstatic state where you become the new man of the future, the Nietzschean merger of Apollo and Dionysus." Ray Manzarek (The Doors)
baggins
Posts: 855
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/14/2012 12:34:55 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/14/2012 12:30:57 PM, phantom wrote:
At 10/13/2012 10:21:17 PM, truthseeker613 wrote:
At 10/12/2012 10:04:34 PM, phantom wrote:
At 10/12/2012 12:57:16 PM, truthseeker613 wrote:

10) meaning in life/ existence - without god there is no meaning/ purpose in life/ existence.

That's why there is no meaning/ purpose in life/existence.

How can you live with that?

Uh, why do you ask? It doesn't change anything in regards to truth that life is depressing.

No it is not. One of the scary aspect of atheism is that it makes life appear meaningless. However atheism is just an man made assumption without any proof.
The Holy Quran 29:19-20

See they not how Allah originates creation, then repeats it: truly that is easy for Allah.

Say: "Travel through the earth and see how Allah did originate creation; so will Allah produce a later creation: for Allah has power over all things.
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/14/2012 12:39:26 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/13/2012 6:57:11 PM, stubs wrote:
At 10/13/2012 12:32:55 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 10/12/2012 9:24:33 PM, stubs wrote:
ontological

Seriously? would say that's like the least convincing argument for God's existence, next to the TAG argument.

If you get the time could you explain your refutation of it?

One can just start off a reverse argument saying "It's possible that a maximally great being doesn't exist", and it works just the same backwards (this makes the ontological argument useless to me). Now, I know what your response is going to be to this (I know you very well Stubs lol). You are going to say that my statement incoherent, because a maximally great being is necessary. Therefore, to say it's possible for a being who is necessary, to not exist, makes no sense, right? However, you are forgetting one important aspect. To make that claim that a maximally great being is necessary, you would already have to presuppose the most controversial premise, that it's possible for a maximally great being to exist. Assuming the most most controversial premise is true, is intellectual dishonesty. You see, a maximally great being isn't automatically necessary. A maximally great being is necessary, if and only if, it's possible for this maximally great being to exist. What reason would we have to assume it's not possible? Any reverse ontological argument of course. So, which argument gets the leg up, the ontological argument, or the reverse ontological argument? None, it's a stalemate. Either way, God's existence is not established.

Basically, a maximally great being isn't "necessary", a maximally great being is "necessary, if and only if, it's possible for the maximally great being to exist". Thus, saying it's possible for a maximally great being to not exist, is not incoherent. The the reverse ontological argument has just as much merit as the ontological argument.

Also, I came up with my own refutation to the ontological argument.

P1: It is possible that a maximally occupying xix exists
P2: A maximally occupying xix exists in some possible world
P3: If a maximally occupying xix exists in some possible word, a maximally occupying xix exists in every possible world
P4: A maximally occupying xix exists in every possible world
P5: A maximally occupying xix exists in the actual world
P6: God does not exist

Definition of xix

A non-sentient entity, which has an existence incompatible with the existence of a maximally great being

Now, you can say it's not possible for a maximally occupying xix to exist, because a maximally great being is necessary. However, I can just say the exact opposite. I could say that a maximally great being cannot exist, because a maximally occupying xix is necessary. This just leaves us at a stalemate. The point is, we are not left with God's existence.

Now, why would a maximally occupying xix have necessary existence? Because it's maximally occupying. If it occupies one possible world, it has to occupy them all, or else it's not maximally occupying.