Quote:
Originally Posted by JoshJ Except for the fact that the only reason the argument supposes god in the first place is the assumption that "Everything must have a cause", which leads to the problem of turtles all the way down.
Richard Dawkins's The God Delusion has an excellent refutation of the ontological argument.
1 The creation of the world is the most marvellous achievement
imaginable.
2 The merit of an achievement is the product of (a) its intrinsic
quality, and (b) the ability of its creator.
3 The greater the disability (or handicap) of the creator, the more
impressive the achievement.
4 The most formidable handicap for a creator would be nonexistence.
5 Therefore if we suppose that the universe is the product of an
existent creator we can conceive a greater being - namely, one
who created everything while not existing.
6 An existing God therefore would not be a being greater than
which a greater cannot be conceived because an even more formidable and incredible creator would be a God which did not
exist.
Ergo:
7 God does not exist. |
I have never once said, and I agree with you that the argument falls apart, if the 1st premise is that Everything has a cause. If this is true, any certain knowledge is impossible.
And Dawkin's argument is ridiculous and I won't say any more about it. It is a good example of an argument that someone
wanting to not believe in God makes. Too many rabbit trails in the thread already though so I'll drop it.