4 months ago
Which side makes a better case?
avatar
14 Comments
  • Filter by:
  • Pro
  • Draw
  • Con
  • 4 months ago

    Great talk my man, was more of a friendly discussion of things we know than a debate, looking forward to more in the future, especially when you read up on some interesting topics related to our subject! 😉

  • 4 months ago

    I thought of an argument. Can god convert 2 chocolates into 3 chocolates? If yes then, god defies math.
    You said god can't defy math

    • 4 months ago

      For the omnipotent paradox, your rebuttal was the situation is illogical. So god can't do it. why is that situation illogical? there are two different outcomes. Either god can lift the stone or not. Both the situations are completely logical. In both the situtatins god proves that he is not omnipotent

      • 4 months ago

        In our debate when I asked why God being maximally great makes him necessary, you said that it's because necessary existence is greater than non-existence, since god is the greatest he necessarily exists

        A counter argument could be
        the greatest possible thing would be one that does everything god does, while not existing

        • 4 months ago

          Can I convert the modal ontological argument like the following?

          God is the greatest.
          Existence is great.
          So God exist.

          Is this an accurate reinterpretation of the modal ontological argument?
          This argument gives no room for god's impossibility where as modal ontological argument has to assume (or prove) the possibility of god.

          If its the same as modal argument, then
          1) This is just putting the word existence in the definition of God.
          2) It's not just for MGB, even a not- so-maximally great being also exist

          A unicorn, 1 quadrillion dollars of cash are some examples of a not-so-maximally great being. So 1 quadrillion dollars of cash exist?

          • 4 months ago

            @mani_bharathy As I read your post, you assume your foundation argument: That God is the greatest. You might better have said "IF God is the greatest and existence is great, then God exists." I would add, since God greatest is not provable, and the greatness of existence is debatable depending on who is asked, then "So God exists" is a nonsequitur which proves nothing.

          • 4 months ago

            @silverbee Yes. That was my opponent's argument. I just re-organised his arguments in a way so that the flaws in his argument are easily visible

        • 4 months ago
        • 4 months ago

          @vladimir_susic_jna care to reply to any of my comments?