Concierge, and a conceptual engineer

[anthon1]

I am, in some respects, a being of habit. When I was younger, I was certainly a creature of fairly strict routine; whilst I've grown out of that (to the point of only now begining to haul myself out of being perpetually late for things), I do still have a certain fondness for things happening in a familiar way at familiar intervals

Comments

[anonymous]

The ontological argument is a load of crap. It's not philosophy at all - at best, meta-philosophy.

It's like making someone follow a mindless and illogical trail of thought, and then at the end, saying, "AHAH! Caught you!! You just admitted GOD EXISTS!!"

Puh-lease.

XX C

[anthon1]

Heh. I disagree; I think it's a very elegant, well thought out and powerful argument. (It just doesn't work, but that's another story.)

The many-worlds hypothesis is a genuine, scientifically sound theory that's come out of quantum physics. As long as that's accepted, it's relatively difficult to argue with the argument, except on the level of the concept of maximal greatness not being contingent with infinite parallel worlds because whilst a maximally great being must logically exist, the different values of 'morality' in the infinite universes (or even complete amorality, given the necessity of purely mechanical and abiotic universes) would render such a quality impossible. I think.

(On that level, it's a lot better than the other ontological arguments, as it's grounded in real science...)

[pleezpleezme]

Alvin Plantinga's ontological argument has to be one of the most ridiculous extensions of the most ridiculous argument for the existence of God EVER.
"so... like... there are all these other worlds, right? and, like, if God exists in one of them, he, uhh, has to exist in all of them, yeah? Cause, like, he can't be maximally great or maximally excellent, y'know, unless he exists in all of them."
THAT'S NOT A FUCKING PROOF! I just want to tell him to get a life.
grrr.
xxxxxx

[anthon1]

*shrugs* As I said to Caroline, I rather like it, mostly. I don't see why you can't have a maximally excellent being that's not maximally great, though...

Chad M

[pleezpleezme]

Did you ever contact Plantinga? If so, can you let me in on the exchange?

~Doxazotheos.com

Re: Chad M

[anthon1]

I've note-mailed him yet, alas - essays and, mostly, laziness have so far got in the way. I can drop you a line when I have done, though, if you want. :)

(This may be an extraordinarily stupid question, so please forgive my asking, but how did you find this post? I'm assuming it's through the link some how, but I'm curious...)