The Ontological Argument

Post Reply New Topic

I found this great philosophical YouTube video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E6yH0QgwR6Q

This video, among other things, proves that it is impossible for an omniscient, omnipotent, omnibenevolent being to exist. That entire concept is logically incoherent.

Sure, if God has to conform to logic.

Why shouldn't God conform to logic? Everything else does.

God is like everything else?

Because God does not have to conform to human logic; or, in simpler terms, human logic is too limited to account for God. Thus, even the 'logic' of the Ontological Argument -- being an imperfect human construct -- is too crude and simplistic to prove or disprove the existence of an infinite, eternal, omnipotent, omniscient, and perfect being.

But human logic is good enough to demonstrate it's own shortcomings.

Well, us humans were made in God's image (supposedly) and yet we run on logic.

This is a huge inconsistency that I keep observing in religious logic. We were made in God's image … and yet he doesn't even have to obey the same logical laws that we have to follow.

Is every unique thing immune to logic? I'm pretty unique. Why do I have to use logic in my day-to-day life?

Most people already apply logic to everyday decision-making. Why not apply logic to things that are larger, such as the universe?

Which is about all that it is good for ... that, and getting despotic Fascist tyrants elected to public office.

Machine logic, on the other hand, has helped design some really awesome video game systems.

Logic has been proven to be internally inconsistent, so logic doesn't conform to logic. Therefore, god needn't conform to logic. Most people apply gut feelings in day to day life - I love the statistics about the harshness of sentencing by judges in correlation with the time since they have last eaten. If you should ever find yourself in front of a court, hope for the sentencing to happen right after lunch, when the judge is the least hangry.
also: may I suggest you have a look at Daniel Kahnemann's research? People are really, really bad at logic, and even if they get advice from mathematicians and statisticians they prefer gut feeling-

The universe is more or less only approached through logic, except for some people who insist that a magic unicorn got it all started. But there are few left nowadays who believe the stars are actually people. All others have accepted that there's giant rocks in a vast void - something only few people have actually experienced and are able to apply gut feeling to.
crap, I forgot that flat earthers exist.... there's more shades of gut feeling about the universe.
but the "unicorn who got it all started" people are basically trying to fill holes in the data, to which logic can't be applied.

I've been watching a lot of videos by CosmicSkeptic lately. I find that he has more maturity than most internet atheists.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=reLZ9qmKOII

Why does god have to be omni anything? Perhaps god created the universe several billion years ago and it has been running on its own since and god doesn't know whats going on in every little corner? Maybe god created the universe but he's not perfect. So he did his best. This omni requirement of god seems to be made up human rules about him.

Consider the Following: If God is omniscient, does He know the outcome of every decision that He will ever make?

Doesn't this mean that God's destiny is already laid out, and that he can't change it?

Omnipotence is not only logically incoherent by itself. It is also incompatible with omniscience.

"We're all puppets, Laurie. I'm just a puppet who can see the strings."
- Dr. Manhattan

If God is omniscient, He knows the billions (to underestimate) of possible outcomes of any decision He might ever make.

His choices are infinite at each node of the decision tree.

Humans can change destiny by manipulating the Future, which doesn't exist. Neither does Space.

Omniscience gives God this vast knowledge. Omnipotence gives him the freedom to use them.