Fun with the Ontological argument

[fstratzero]

WLC's version

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, then 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.


Replace "being" with "noun" and enjoy flooding the universe with random maximally great anythings.

Also you can insert numbers.

1. It is possible that ∞ maximally great beings exist.
2. If it is possible that ∞ maximally great beings exist, then ∞ maximally great beings exist in some possible world.
3. If ∞ maximally great beings exist in some possible world, then they exist in every possible world.
4. If ∞ maximally great beings exist in every possible world, then they exist in the actual world.
5. If ∞ maximally great beings exist in the actual world, then ∞ maximally great beings exist.
6. Therefore, ∞ maximally great beings exist.

And therefore you can flood the universe, with maximally great beings, using Georg Cantor's set theory with several sets of infinite numbers of infinite numbers.

Which of course leads to a contradiction cause the universe is finite, and cast infinite amounts of maximally great things into a finite space would destroy that finite space.

hahahahahaha

[fstratzero]

I CAST ONTOLOGICAL ARGUMENT

1. It is possible that a maximally great unicorn exists.
2. If it is possible that a maximally great unicorn exists, then a maximally great unicorn exists in some possible world.
3. If a maximally great unicorn exists in some possible world, then it exists in every possible world.
4. If a maximally great unicorn exists in every possible world, then it exists in the actual world.
5. If a maximally great unicorn exists in the actual world, then a maximally great unicorn exists.
6. Therefore, a maximally great unicorn exists.

[houseofcantor]

That's fun? You need to get out more.

[Chas]

(16-12-2012 06:29 AM)houseofcantor Wrote:  That's fun? You need to get out more.

Or maybe he needs to get more in and out.

[Erxomai]

(16-12-2012 07:50 AM)Chas Wrote:  

(16-12-2012 06:29 AM)houseofcantor Wrote:  That's fun? You need to get out more.

Or maybe he needs to get more in and out.

Yeah, me too; but it's too bad In-n-Out drive-ins are only in California. I could really go for a Double Double animal style. :drooling:

[Reltzik]

Doesn't work with infinity, because "maximally great" means "the one and only greatest, everything else is lesser." (The existence of a maximally great object in any set, even at just the conceptual level, with a given comparator is an unwarranted assumption. As is the unstated choice of comparator. Oh, you wacky WLC.)

Otherwise, have fun.

[fstratzero]

(16-12-2012 10:14 AM)Reltzik Wrote:  Doesn't work with infinity, because "maximally great" means "the one and only greatest, everything else is lesser." (The existence of a maximally great object in any set, even at just the conceptual level, with a given comparator is an unwarranted assumption. As is the unstated choice of comparator. Oh, you wacky WLC.)

Otherwise, have fun.

What if you cloned god with all it's attributes?

[Chas]

(16-12-2012 12:07 PM)fstratzero Wrote:  

(16-12-2012 10:14 AM)Reltzik Wrote:  Doesn't work with infinity, because "maximally great" means "the one and only greatest, everything else is lesser." (The existence of a maximally great object in any set, even at just the conceptual level, with a given comparator is an unwarranted assumption. As is the unstated choice of comparator. Oh, you wacky WLC.)

Otherwise, have fun.

What if you cloned god with all it's attributes?

Especially the attribute of non-existence.

[fstratzero]

(16-12-2012 12:12 PM)Chas Wrote:  

(16-12-2012 12:07 PM)fstratzero Wrote:  What if you cloned god with all it's attributes?

Especially the attribute of non-existence.

Exactly there is no reason why if one all powerful being exists then any other one could not also exist.

From there you just feed in all the names for all the different all powerful beings into the ontological argument.

[Starcrash]

You can't have an infinite number of maximum anythings -- you can't even have just two beings that are the "greatest". A superlative can only exist in singularity.

Of course, I agree that WLC's argument is laughable. Premise #1 seems easy enough to defend, even though I can think of some examples of properties that can't be "maximal" (for instance, is it possible for something to be maximally slow-moving? Isn't there always a slower speed than whatever you could imagine?). Premise #2 is indefensible, though. How would one prove that something must exist simply because it can exist?