• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

The Existence of God

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Originally posted by: CollectiveUnconscious
Originally posted by: furie27
Originally posted by: CollectiveUnconscious
Originally posted by: furie27
Faulty syllogism, there's nothing to back up your second statement.
Click to expand...

When someone describes something to you, do you not understand it. Simply speaking, there is nothing greater than that which nothing greater can be conceived. I have described it to you, you should now understand it the same as someone who describes a cardinal to you.
Click to expand...

You're correct I've understood your account. Understanding the account of something and understanding the thing itself are two completely different things.
Click to expand...

Ah, St. Aquinas I have found you. And yet, you understand the account, and so it is in your understanding.
Click to expand...

I must congratulate you on the Aquinas reference, however man is not the measure of all things, Protagoras.
 
Originally posted by: CollectiveUnconscious
God is conceived as perfect, TT is something which nothing greater can be conceived, thus God is TT. This is arguing a definition. Simply leave it as TT if you wish.
Click to expand...
No, prove that it is God and not a unicorn.

Yes, there is a greatest conceivable concept (you named that greatest concept God, Darthvoy named that greatest concept Unicorn). Now prove that concept is a person, place, thing, qualtiy, or action.
 
Originally posted by: dullard
Originally posted by: CollectiveUnconscious
God is conceived as perfect, TT is something which nothing greater can be conceived, thus God is TT. This is arguing a definition. Simply leave it as TT if you wish.
Click to expand...
No, prove that it is God and not a unicorn.
Click to expand...

Who says God is not a unicorn. If there is a unicorn that is greater than all else that can be conceived, then a unicorn is TT, but that unicorn would be God, as it is perfect.

Edit: I must grade papers, I will resume this when I am finished.
 
Regarding TT, how can you differentiate the concept from more well-known antinomies like "The prime number than which no greater prime number can be conceived"?

In other words, what support is there for the implicit notion that a limit must exist to our ability to conceive "greatness"?
 
Originally posted by: CollectiveUnconscious
Originally posted by: dullard
Originally posted by: CollectiveUnconscious
God is conceived as perfect, TT is something which nothing greater can be conceived, thus God is TT. This is arguing a definition. Simply leave it as TT if you wish.
Click to expand...
No, prove that it is God and not a unicorn.
Click to expand...

Who says God is not a unicorn. If there is a unicorn that is greater than all else that can be conceived, then a unicorn is TT, but that unicorn would be God, as it is perfect.
Click to expand...

but unicorns don't exist do they....
 
I have to say that after reading the Wikipedia definition, this may be the worst argued "proof" of anything ever. It's basically the overdone BS philosophy that also argues you can prove something doesn't exist by simply not acknowledging that it does! So, in his same logic I can prove God DOES NOT exist with a simple statement ..... "What God?"
 
Originally posted by: CollectiveUnconscious
Who says God is not a unicorn. If there is a unicorn that is greater than all else that can be conceived, then a unicorn is TT, but that unicorn would be God, as it is perfect.
Click to expand...
You are going around in circles and not proving anything. Prove that this greatest possible CONCEPT is a person, place, thing, quality, action, etc. Prove that this CONCEPT has any of the qualities that ANY religion gives to any god.

You stated that the XYZ concept is perfect. Then you proved that there is a such thing as a perfect concept. Now, prove that XYZ is anything other than a concept. Yes, the concept of perfection exists - but can you prove that anything other than a concept (even God) is perfect.
 
And I forgot to mention. In all technicality "That than which is greater than what can be conceived" or whatever is the universe. We understand the concept that it refers to, but it is too vast, magnificent, and all inclusive for us to truly ever conceive it in it's entirety. Therefore the universe is the greatest thing that exists, but no one can conceive of it.
 
Originally posted by: thraashman
And I forgot to mention. In all technicality "That than which is greater than what can be conceived" or whatever is the universe. We understand the concept that it refers to, but it is too vast, magnificent, and all inclusive for us to truly ever conceive it in it's entirety. Therefore the universe is the greatest thing that exists, but no one can conceive of it.
Click to expand...

Space is big. Really big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind-bogglingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the road to the chemist, but that's just peanuts to space.
 
the term God is too vague for this to be true in my opinion....if you cant define god you cant say it exists..because there is no concept to begin with..its just a word that people use to represent their culture and ego
 
Originally posted by: CollectiveUnconscious
First you must understand the phrase "That Than Which Nothing Greater Can Be Conceived (which will now be refered to as TT)."

1. God is TT.
2. When the fool hears TT he understands it.
3. When TT is understood, TT exists in understanding.
4. Whatever exists in both reality and understanding is greater than what exists only in understanding.
5. TT is greater than everything else
6. If TT exists only in the understanding then there must be somethinng greater than TT
7. Therefore, TT exists in reality.

I will take a position of defense, attack this if you wish.
Note: This is not saying that there is a God as defined by a specific religion; rather, that there is a God.
Click to expand...

your second statement should be "When the fool hears TT he acknowledges that it's true thus the only out for your syllogism would be that he doesn't acknowledge the prior statement thus invalidating your syllogism. i think everyone learns this syllogism in PHY 1533
 
Originally posted by: LumbergTech
the term God is too vague for this to be true in my opinion....if you cant define god you cant say it exists..because there is no concept to begin with..its just a word that people use to represent their culture and ego
Click to expand...

god is defined as "a being of which nothing greater can be conceived and who omnipotent and omniscient."
 
Circular thinking. God exists because people believe he exists. Yet, god needs to create the people who believe he exists. But if people need to believe he exists in order for God to exists, then how could people be created?

It's a Chicken and Egg scenario.
 
From what I'm reading, your argument boils down to.

1) God is the greatest thing possible
2) Something that exists is greater than something that does not exist.
3) Therefore by using 1 and 2, God must exist.

Right?

 
Originally posted by: puffff
It's not an assumption. It's a definition. That's how these ontological proofs work.
Click to expand...
And we know ontological proofs are not proofs. He proved that the idea of perfection exists. Now take it that last step. Prove that idea is anything other than an idea (ie that idea is actually a being called God). Otherwise all you have done is to define the idea of perfection by a different name: God.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top