User Controls
Proof of the existence of God
-
2017-03-31 at 6:18 PM UTCIn the late 11th century, the monk Anselm wrote his theological treatise Proslogion, in which he formulates an argument in favor of the existence of God to be used for the instruction of his brothers. The argument goes something like this:
> God is that than which nothing greater can be conceived of, in your understanding.
> Because you know what I'm talking about, the concept of that than which nothing greater can be thought is in within your understanding.
> The only thing better than the possession of a perfect thing in your understanding is its existence in reality.
> The real thing you have thought cannot possibly be greater than that than which nothing greater can be thought, it would be a logical contradiction as informed by its status as that than which nothing greater can be thought.
> Therefore, that than which nothing greater can be thought must also exist in reality.
What objections can be raised to this proof?
Edited to include source text. Fuck, I'm too stoned to properly include pics.
Post last edited by Zanick #2 at 2017-03-31T21:06:41.991616+00:00
Post last edited by Zanick #2 at 2017-03-31T21:07:56.738965+00:00The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2017-03-31 at 6:21 PM UTCThe fact that you defined God as only something greater than your understanding.
-
2017-03-31 at 6:22 PM UTC
-
2017-03-31 at 6:25 PM UTC
Originally posted by Open Your Mind How should God be defined?
I don't know, but defining something based on one characteristic isn't a sufficient definition. In this case, how do you even define god? It depends on what definition you are talking about, because there are a lot of ways that could be interpreted. But simply saying that a banana is yellow therefore this yellow object is a banana is insufficient -
2017-03-31 at 6:26 PM UTC
-
2017-03-31 at 6:26 PM UTCI dont see that as a problem. My problem is that god seems to be a notion of understanding it is beyond human conception. While there is an argument to be made there it seems incomprehensive to me. A great many great things are beyond our grasp.
-
2017-03-31 at 6:51 PM UTCso you're saying god is a vagina then?
-
2017-03-31 at 6:56 PM UTC
-
2017-03-31 at 7:29 PM UTCThe biggest objection is that Anselm was a faggot
-
2017-03-31 at 7:32 PM UTCAlso the "proof" is a cleverly hidden tautology. The argument is essentially "God exists cuz he's perfect, so he's gotta exist trust me my nigga".The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
-
2017-03-31 at 7:35 PM UTC
Originally posted by Zanick #2 In the late 11th century, the monk Anselm wrote his theological treatise Proslogion, in which he formulates an argument in favor of the existence of God to be used for the instruction of his brothers. The argument goes something like this:
> God is that than which nothing greater can be conceived of, in your understanding.
> Because you know what I'm talking about, the concept of that than which nothing greater can be thought is in within your understanding.
> The only thing better than the possession of a perfect thing in your understanding is its existence in reality.
> The real thing you have thought cannot possibly be greater than that than which nothing greater can be thought, it would be a logical contradiction as informed by its status as that than which nothing greater can be thought.
> Therefore, that than which nothing greater can be thought must also exist in reality.
What objections can be raised to this proof?
I just googled a translation of that wall of garbage. i didnt read all 8 billion pages of it, but the portions i did read leads to the only plausible conclusion: the writer of that is a fucking retard with a mediocre grasp of big words and orienting them to confuse people who are easily impressionable.
there is no god. -
2017-03-31 at 7:58 PM UTC
Originally posted by infinityshock I just googled a translation of that wall of garbage. i didnt read all 8 billion pages of it, but the portions i did read leads to the only plausible conclusion: the writer of that is a fucking retard with a mediocre grasp of big words and orienting them to confuse people who are easily impressionable.
there is no god.
Your analysis is bad and you should feel bad.
Inb4 bill the clit begins a tirade of sexual inuendo that he believes cleverly hides his latent homosexuality. -
2017-03-31 at 8:08 PM UTCLack of evidence to disprove does not equal proof.
-
2017-03-31 at 9:05 PM UTC
-
2017-03-31 at 9:23 PM UTCpretty much yeah. but its relevent to this argument.
oh, and its true. -
2017-03-31 at 10:14 PM UTCGods real the Bible tells me and I can feel Jesus in my heartThe following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
-
2017-03-31 at 10:15 PM UTCI think Bitchens aaid something like "that which can be asserted without any evidence, can be dismissed without any evidence" or some shit.
-
2017-03-31 at 10:17 PM UTC
-
2017-03-31 at 10:27 PM UTC
Originally posted by Rhymin Hymen Your analysis is bad and you should feel bad.
Inb4 bill the clit begins a tirade of sexual inuendo that he believes cleverly hides his latent homosexuality.
your crack-induced opinion on my facts is the epitome of retardation, you clueless gibbering faggot.
nothing is being hidden. I really want to pulverize your tonsils with the head of my cock -
2017-03-31 at 10:34 PM UTC
