You are viewing the historical archive of The Philosophy Forum.
For current discussions, visit the live forum.
Go to live forum

Amalac

Comments

«Someday when after a hard day's work you have a earned for yourself a great appetite, you must visit and I'll serve you a wonderful logical and non-c...
March 04, 2021 at 18:47
«it seems to me you make a fatal mistake in not distinguishing between a thing and the idea of a thing. Indeed I would agree that we can have an idea ...
March 04, 2021 at 17:44
And I already gave you my response, to which you have yet to respond: Leibniz already responded implicitly to that view: «It follows also that creatur...
March 04, 2021 at 17:29
Like I said, argument A is only valid if we accept premise 2. Why should we accept it? If the propositions «God exists» and «God is conceivable» are n...
March 04, 2021 at 17:17
Or perhaps I misunderstood you, and you are taking a view similar to Kant's, i.e. that it is an antinomy. Now what concerns me about that is that what...
March 04, 2021 at 15:18
«2. If God is the greatest being then nothing can be God's equal in any respect, anywhere and at any time » Why should I accept this premise? See my p...
March 04, 2021 at 15:08
«First, we have to understand what is abstract concepts as "perfection" "limits" and "God" What if you never heard of these? Well welcome to extreme e...
March 04, 2021 at 15:01
«Ergo, god is neither conceivable nor inconceivable, god can't be anything at all if god is the "...greatest being..." Is god nothing then? I'll leave...
March 04, 2021 at 14:47
«If god exists as an idea then god is conceivable. An ant, ping pong ball, a dog, etc are all conceivable. Ergo, being conceivable doesn't seem the ri...
March 04, 2021 at 14:36
«Maybe ultimate goodness is a place and feeling we experience when we die, not some God out there watching us» So you are arguing that non-existence m...
March 04, 2021 at 14:16
I'll be eagerly waiting for when you find what is off then.
March 04, 2021 at 04:20
Yes, even better stated.
March 04, 2021 at 04:07
Yes, that is a good formalization of the argument. You should only add a premise that 2 is true because that is what is implied by non-existence being...
March 04, 2021 at 04:03
1.Let's hear those assumptions then. 2. Again, I don't see what «ultimate goodness» has to to do with the argument. I don't mention goodness even once...
March 04, 2021 at 03:45
Plus, perfection doesn't just involve «good». Goodness is only one among other perfections, such as existence. The argument depends on «existence» as ...
March 04, 2021 at 03:26
1. «All that we know of good is beauty in the world, the goodness of children, and virtue in adults. Trying to conceptualize a being having all those ...
March 04, 2021 at 03:21
1.«Yes, but those philosophers are confused and did not have the benefit of being exposed to my argument. I have been exposed to theirs, but not they ...
March 04, 2021 at 03:00
« I have no idea what that means. "Positive" - what does that mean? Does it mean exists, perhaps? I just don't know what that definition means.» «Leib...
March 04, 2021 at 02:25
1. «A being who is constrained by the laws of logic is less powerful than one who is not. Thus an all powerful being is not constrained by the laws of...
March 04, 2021 at 02:12
1. «The subject of all perfections» is the definition of God I take from Leibniz. 2. No, I am not using the words «perfection» and «exists» as synonim...
March 04, 2021 at 01:52
When you say the subject of all perfections does not exist, then if you admit that existence and non-existence are predicates, then that subject must ...
March 04, 2021 at 01:19
1. “First, why would it be impossible to conceive of God's non existence? ” «Let us assume that the subject of all perfections does not exist: then no...
March 04, 2021 at 01:00
1. “Why do you think a subject of perfection is conceivable?” A subject of all perfections can be conceived means: We can understand the proposition: ...
March 04, 2021 at 00:20