home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!olivea!pagesat!netsys!agate!iat.holonet.net!psinntp!psinntp!wrldlnk!usenet
- From: p00168@psilink.com (James F. Tims)
- Newsgroups: alt.atheism
- Subject: Re: Ontological argument...
- Message-ID: <2937161325.7.p00168@psilink.com>
- Date: 26 Jan 93 18:14:35 GMT
- Sender: usenet@worldlink.com
- Organization: none
- Lines: 32
- In-Reply-To: <1993Jan25.092649.6404@scubed.com>
- Nntp-Posting-Host: 127.0.0.1
- X-Mailer: PSILink (3.2)
-
- >DATE: 25 Jan 93 09:26:49 GMT
- >FROM: Darin Wilkins <wilkins@scubed.com>
- >
- >Alan Blair writes:
- >
- >>The basic ontological argument for the existence of god goes along
- >>these lines...
- >
- >>"God is conceived as being perfect; non-existence would be an
- >>imperfection; thus God must exist"
- >
- [...]
- >with the entity 'Invisible Pink Unicorns'. For example, in the version
- >you post above:
- >
- >"Invisible Pink Unicorns are conceived as being perfect; non-existence
- >would be an imperfection; thus Invisible Pink Unicorns must exist"
- >
- >A convincing argument, wouldn't you say?
- >
- >(BTW, this idea is not original with me. Someone on the net - I don't
- >recall who - suggested this a couple of years ago. Does anyone recall
- >who it was?)
-
- Thanks, guys! Try this. Imagine the world's strongest chessplaying
- software is on your disk, optimized for your system.
- Now imagine that it doesn't exist. Takes up a lot of disk space, but it's
- cheaper than Deep Thought!
-
- Looks like I'm on the wrong end of a mate in 3, here. See ya...
-
- -jim
-