|
Ratci
Esper<3



Registered: 08/27/08
Posts: 1,039
Loc: Coumbia MD
Last seen: 11 years, 1 month
|
Anselm's Ontological Argument
#11069215 - 09/16/09 10:21 AM (14 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
St. Anselm uses a form of logic called "reductio ad absurdum," in which one follows a statement to a false or contradictory conclusion in order to prove that the opposite of that statement must be true.
His argument goes something like:
1) God is the greatest possible being.
2) Assume God does not exist.
3) But then God could be greater than he is, namely, if he existed.
4) God is the greatest possible being and he is greater than he is.
5) God exists
would anyone like to take a stab at this? I want to hear you go at it ^_^
-------------------- People like us, who believe in physics, know that the distinction between past, present, and future is only a stubbornly persistent illusion. --Albert Einstein
|
kydelic
Stranger



Registered: 06/08/09
Posts: 371
Last seen: 12 years, 8 months
|
Re: Anselm's Ontological Argument [Re: Ratci]
#11069304 - 09/16/09 10:37 AM (14 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
God can't be greater than He is if He is assumed not to exist (if, indeed, this is an argument for the objective reality of the Christian God, which I take it to be).
-------------------- http://flickr.com/photos/mycography - A collection of my fungal photography
|
oxalic32


Registered: 01/27/08
Posts: 3,615
Loc: .
Last seen: 12 years, 9 months
|
Re: Anselm's Ontological Argument [Re: Ratci]
#11070756 - 09/16/09 02:49 PM (14 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Have you ever heard the perfect island argument?
Swap perfect island with god. Does the perfect island exist? No.
|
DieCommie

Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
|
Re: Anselm's Ontological Argument [Re: Ratci]
#11070806 - 09/16/09 02:55 PM (14 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
A common problem with arguments like this is a bad, not true or overly esoteric premises.
With this one its the premise that god is the greatest being and that alone defines him. Thats simply not the case for most cultures and people. Usually god is defined as a creator or the creator of the universe or there is a whole hierarchy of gods where some are certainly greater than others. And of course 'great' is an ill defined trait with much subjectivity. For these reason I dont find the argument interesting.
|
Ratci
Esper<3



Registered: 08/27/08
Posts: 1,039
Loc: Coumbia MD
Last seen: 11 years, 1 month
|
Re: Anselm's Ontological Argument [Re: kydelic]
#11071086 - 09/16/09 03:45 PM (14 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
kydelic said: God can't be greater than He is if He is assumed not to exist (if, indeed, this is an argument for the objective reality of the Christian God, which I take it to be).
I'm sorry, not 'is greater than he is' but 'could be greater than he is'
-------------------- People like us, who believe in physics, know that the distinction between past, present, and future is only a stubbornly persistent illusion. --Albert Einstein
|
MarkostheGnostic
Elder


Registered: 12/09/99
Posts: 14,279
Loc: South Florida
Last seen: 3 years, 1 month
|
Re: Anselm's Ontological Argument [Re: Ratci]
#11072856 - 09/16/09 09:02 PM (14 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Deus est qua maius cogitari non potest.
"God is that, more than which cannot be conceived."
The single thing that I appreciated about Anselm's ontological argument, that I read, circa 1974. The only thing more distasteful was reading portions of Aquinas's Summa Theologica. Of that, at least, Aquinas was alleged to have said, "It's all straw." Aristotelian logic just isn't the right tool for the right job, IMO. Platonic thought seems to derive directly from The Psychedelic Experience, which is a much much better tool for using concepts to approximate Ultimate Reality.
-------------------- γνῶθι σαὐτόν - Gnothi Seauton - Know Thyself
|
Sventington
am what I am what I am what I am

Registered: 01/17/09
Posts: 532
Last seen: 12 years, 7 months
|
|
I like the argument, not because I think it's valid, but because it makes me smile. I think it's a funny argument, one ends up defining something into existence.
|
meatcakeman
the search for bodhisattva



Registered: 07/03/07
Posts: 8,380
Loc: el sol
Last seen: 10 years, 10 months
|
Re: Anselm's Ontological Argument [Re: Ratci]
#11074636 - 09/17/09 01:57 AM (14 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Ratci said: St. Anselm uses a form of logic called "reductio ad absurdum," in which one follows a statement to a false or contradictory conclusion in order to prove that the opposite of that statement must be true.
His argument goes something like:
1) God is the greatest possible being.
2) Assume God does not exist.
3) But then God could be greater than he is, namely, if he existed.
4) God is the greatest possible being and he is greater than he is.
5) God exists
would anyone like to take a stab at this? I want to hear you go at it ^_^
I feel like I'm in my Ethics and the Meaning of Life class all over again.
I suck at these.
So I'll spare you the homosexuality and not try and take a stab at it.
-------------------- 大开眼界
 
Hasta siempre, comandante.
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery



Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 95,368
Loc: underbelly
|
|
"God is that, more than which cannot be conceived."
So is everything that is not "God".
-------------------- "Don't believe everything you think". -Anom. " All that lives was born to die"-Anom. With much wisdom comes much sorrow, The more knowledge, the more grief. Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC
|
Noteworthy
Sophyphile


Registered: 10/05/08
Posts: 5,599
Last seen: 11 years, 1 month
|
Re: Anselm's Ontological Argument [Re: Ratci]
#11080836 - 09/17/09 11:28 PM (14 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Ratci said:
1) God is the greatest possible being.
2) Assume God does not exist.
3) But then God could be greater than he is, namely, if he existed.
4) God is the greatest possible being and he is greater than he is.
5) God exists
The problem with Anslem's riddle is that he treats existance as a predicate that can be applied to god seperately to talking about god in the first place.
Ie. one view of existance says that everything that we can talk about 'exists'. Thus In order to say that God is the greatest possible being, we must first assume he exists.
Another way is looking at existance as if it is modal, or indexical. In order words, things exist in different ways. So you could say that God is the greatest possible thing, and that would simply mean that 'the concept god means the greatest possible thing'. you could then say that 'god does not exist' but you are actually saying 'god exists as an idea'.
You can't compare 'real' god and 'imaginary' god. They are both 'god', its just that one of them 'really exists'. it is not greater or worse, it merely IS rather than ISNT.
If someone is going to say that 'existing' makes you 'better' than something that 'doesnt exist', then by stating that 'god doesnt exist' you are essentially saying that 'actually god is not the greatest possible thing'.
You see, in order to say that 'God is the greatest thing possible' you have to say
'God is the greatest thing possible as long as he actually exists'
and the rest follows fine:
'God does not exist'
Therefor God is not the greatest thing possible. The greatest thing possible is a Modified version of God that DOES exist.
--------------------

|
Kanye.Eastwood
Stranger

Registered: 09/17/09
Posts: 10
Last seen: 14 years, 4 months
|
Re: Anselm's Ontological Argument [Re: Ratci]
#11080978 - 09/17/09 11:57 PM (14 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Ratci said:
Quote:
kydelic said: God can't be greater than He is if He is assumed not to exist (if, indeed, this is an argument for the objective reality of the Christian God, which I take it to be).
I'm sorry, not 'is greater than he is' but 'could be greater than he is'
assuming that god does exist, and he is all powerful, how can something or someone that is the most powerful in all existence be more powerful than itself/himself?
|
MarkostheGnostic
Elder


Registered: 12/09/99
Posts: 14,279
Loc: South Florida
Last seen: 3 years, 1 month
|
Re: Anselm's Ontological Argument [Re: Icelander]
#11084420 - 09/18/09 04:02 PM (14 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said: "God is that, more than which cannot be conceived."
So is everything that is not "God".
Yes, but only if taken taken all-at-once, instead of one-at-a-time.
-------------------- γνῶθι σαὐτόν - Gnothi Seauton - Know Thyself
|
Ratci
Esper<3



Registered: 08/27/08
Posts: 1,039
Loc: Coumbia MD
Last seen: 11 years, 1 month
|
|
Quote:
Kanye.Eastwood said:
Quote:
Ratci said:
Quote:
kydelic said: God can't be greater than He is if He is assumed not to exist (if, indeed, this is an argument for the objective reality of the Christian God, which I take it to be).
I'm sorry, not 'is greater than he is' but 'could be greater than he is'
assuming that god does exist, and he is all powerful, how can something or someone that is the most powerful in all existence be more powerful than itself/himself?
if it didn't exist
|
|