Ontological Argument

Discussion in 'General Philosophy' started by LionHearted, Nov 9, 2002.

  1. LionHearted Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    105
    Could someone explain to me the ontological argument for the existence of God? I have read about it, but don't understand it. It has something to do with the idea that since we can conceive of God, he must exist.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. EvilPoet I am what I am Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,007
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Tyler Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,888
    I think this paragraph sums up the stupidity pretty well:

    "I conceive of a being than which no greater can be conceived. If a being than which no greater can be conceived does not exist, then I can conceive of a being greater than a being than which no greater can be conceived -- namely, a being than which no greater can be conceived that exists. I cannot conceive of a being greater than a being than which no greater can be conceived. Hence, a being than which no greater can be conceived exists"
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. p_ete2001 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    355
    Im glad u made that clear tyler

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    lol
     
  8. SoLiDUS OMGWTFBBQ Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,593
    When looking to see something, we must sometimes change our
    angle to view it properly, otherwise too many pieces are missing
    for us to enjoy what it is we wanted to see in the first place.

    You're looking at it from the wrong perspective; I suggest you
    peruse the available information in "Reason and Responsibility".
    Cheers.
     
  9. LionHearted Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    105
    So a perfect being must exist because if he didn't, then we could conceive a greater being and no greater being than God can be conceived? So God therefore exists?
     
  10. Nebula Occasionally Frequent Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    906
    Put it this way:

    It's a REALLY stupid argument.

    *EDIT*

    I should specify why. I think this is a cicular argument because they are defining God in such a way that he must exist. It's only words, and I'm not sure if God yeilds to logic.

    It's as dumb as question as "if God is omnipotent, can he create a rock so heavy he can't lift it?"....
     
  11. SoLiDUS OMGWTFBBQ Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,593
    You guys like complicating things for no reason, eh? :bugeye:

    The reason for the ontological argument is simple: some people
    contend that an ordered universe following specific logical rules
    cannot have come into existence out of a perfect vacuum without
    a form of conscious intelligence behind it. As far as I'm concerned,
    it makes perfect sense, but as many readily like to point out, this
    is a useless complication.

    The reasoning goes a little something like this: if a conscious
    entity can come into existence out of a perfect vacuum, why
    not a universe with logical rules ?

    In the end, neither side can prove that the universe was or
    wasn't an intelligent being's creation, so there isn't really a
    point in arguing: believe in what you think makes the most
    sense to you and leave others alone to decide what they
    think is the more logical choice.

    Sometimes, I just don't understand ya'll ...

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  12. EvilPoet I am what I am Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,007
  13. prozak Banned Banned

    Messages:
    782
    Fuck Wikipedia; too much bias in summarization maketh a source of futility, not information.

    Ontological arguments seem to me to base themselves upon the nature of the limitation of human consciousness, and from it derive an arbitrary solution. The concept of "god" has to preexist for them to function.

    In other words, bad mental hygiene, like the concept of Dog itself.
     
  14. Xev Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,943
    Basically, the ontological argument states that if I can concieve of the Invisible Purple Unicorn, then the invisible purple unicorn exists.
     
  15. prozak Banned Banned

    Messages:
    782
    Not only that, but there are rules that the Invisible Purple Unicorn has, and these are also proof of his/her existence.

    - Nonbelievers are bad.
    - Anything which makes you not believe is bad.
    - That which is bad hates the Invisible Purple Unicorn because it doesn't believe in the IPU.
    - Drugs are bad.
     
  16. Xev Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,943
    Prozak:

    And one does not believe in the IPU because one hates the IPU. Why does one hate the IPU? Probably because you blasphemers don't like fuzzy kittens and hot chocalate with marshmallows!

    Personally, I prefer the Great Cthulhu, who really doesn't care if you believe in him or not, because he will eat your soul all the same.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  17. Nebula Occasionally Frequent Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    906
    Xev;

    Who told you humans have souls?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  18. Neutrino_Albatross Legion of Dynamic Discord Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    751
    Well i know that Invisible Purple Unicorns dont exist because if the unicorn is invisible how can it possibly purple.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  19. Xev Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,943
    Heretic.
     
  20. prozak Banned Banned

    Messages:
    782
    Cthulhu's a badass.

    Those who do not worship the IPU are terrorists! -- GWB
     
  21. Neutrino_Albatross Legion of Dynamic Discord Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    751
    Really though.

    Being purple is a visual characteristic and anything thats invisible has no apearance. For that matter how do we know that the invisible creature in question is actually a unicorn?

    See the truth you must reject the false IPUs.

    And Cthulhu too.

    Hail Eris!
     
  22. Xev Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,943
    Eris is a whore.

    BOB LOVES YOU!
     
  23. Neutrino_Albatross Legion of Dynamic Discord Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    751
    And your point is...?
     

Share This Page