as seen here:
The idea of god is an all knowing, all powerful, existing in every possible world.
Thats part of what it means to be maximally great. (i.e. god.)
1.It is possible that a maximally great being exists.
2.If it is possible that a maximally great being exists, then a maximally great being exists in some possible world.
3. If a maximally great being exists in some possible world, it exists in every possible world.
4.If a maximally great being exists in every possible world, then it exists in the actual world.
5. If a maximally great being exists in the actual world, then a maximally great being exists.
6. Therefore a maximally great being exists.
Premisses 2-6 are relatively UNCONTROVERSIAL. Most philosophers would agree, that if gods existence is even "possible" then its follows logically that god must exist.
The principle to be settled is premise ONE.
The atheist has GOT to say that its "IMPOSSIBLE" that god exists.
You have got to say that the concept of god is "incoherent" like the concept of a round square or a married bachelor.
Before you go spouting your arguments, skip to 12:02 in the video.
The point is, atheists (not scientists) have to admit that you have to say that god therefore is IMPOSSIBLE to exist.
Maximally great means, all powerful all knowing, all good and he would exist in every logical possible world. A being/ something (including burritos) that did not have those properties would not therefore be "maximally great" we could conceive of something "greater"
Im sorry but I can sure think of something greater than a burrito.
Or he would not be "maximally great"
Someone who WAS omnipresent would be greater.
Anyone that doesn't understand this, doesn't understand the widely understood concept of "god" in the first place.
I shouldn't have to explain it.
But I am.
Most Helpful Girl
No. I'll give you premise one (it is possible that a maximally great being exists), but it's downhill from there.
In the second premise "some possible world" is just a hypothetical place. It's someplace imagined, so if you imagine God exists there or not- it means nothing. It's in your head, and you could imagine anything in your head, but that doesn't mean it actually exists in real life.
Premise three, again, sure if a being is "maximally great" and existed in one world it would exist in all others in order to satisy the qualification of "maximally great", but the argument is still only talking about existence in fantasy worlds.
Premise four, you'd have to show that these made up worlds are real, or else you can't equate them or group them with the actual world.
Premise 5&6, sure, but since the other premises don't hold up they're redundant.1
- Show AllShow Less