Total Posts:4|Showing Posts:1-4
Jump to topic:

A reverse ontological argument.

FrackJack
Posts: 1,392
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/26/2013 2:14:37 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
"Gasking asserted that the creation of the world is the most marvellous achievement imaginable. The merit of such an achievement is the product of its quality and the creator's ability: the greater the disability of the creator, the more impressive the achievement. Non-existence, Gasking asserts, would be the greatest handicap. Therefore, if the universe is the product of an existent creator, we could conceive of a greater being"one which does not exist. A non-existent creator is greater than one which exists, so God does not exist.[53] Gasking's proposition that the greatest disability would be non-existence is a response to Anselm's assumption that existence is a predicate and perfection. Gasking uses this logic to assume that non-existence must be a disability."

http://en.wikipedia.org...
: At 8/8/2013 6:15:09 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
: The idiots are rebelling.

http://i.imgur.com...
medv4380
Posts: 200
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/26/2013 2:21:52 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
It's an interesting way to go about it, but it's weak and falls apart if you ever try to elaborate on Infinite or Nothing.
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/26/2013 2:28:29 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/26/2013 2:14:37 PM, FrackJack wrote:
"Gasking asserted that the creation of the world is the most marvellous achievement imaginable. The merit of such an achievement is the product of its quality and the creator's ability: the greater the disability of the creator, the more impressive the achievement. Non-existence, Gasking asserts, would be the greatest handicap. Therefore, if the universe is the product of an existent creator, we could conceive of a greater being"one which does not exist. A non-existent creator is greater than one which exists, so God does not exist.[53] Gasking's proposition that the greatest disability would be non-existence is a response to Anselm's assumption that existence is a predicate and perfection. Gasking uses this logic to assume that non-existence must be a disability."

http://en.wikipedia.org...

The argument fails because maximally great entails being able to do anything logically and metaphysically possible, not anything logically metaphysically impossible. Since something non-existing creating something is an incoherent notion, one would not expect maximal greatness to entail creation from a non-existent entity.
PureX
Posts: 1,522
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/26/2013 2:53:05 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/26/2013 2:21:52 PM, medv4380 wrote:
It's an interesting way to go about it, but it's weak and falls apart if you ever try to elaborate on Infinite or Nothing.

Yes, which such a proposition would be required to do, to explicate itself.