Return to nickhill.dyndns.org/s
What would a universe without God look like?
The Ontological Argument specifies that if it is even possible that God exists, then God actually exists:
1. It is possible that a maximally great being exists.
2. If it is possible that a maximally great being exists, then a maximally great being exists in some possible world.
3. If a maximally great being exists in some possible world, then it exists in every possible world.
4. If a maximally great being exists in every possible world, then it exists in the actual world.
5. If a maximally great being exists in the actual world, then a maximally great being exists.
6. Therefore, a maximally great being exists.
Therefore, there is no conceivable universe in which God does not exist. It is not possible for there to be a universe without God in it. Therefore, the only alternative to this universe existing is nothing:
1. It is possible that a universe exists without God.
2. The Ontological Argument concludes that there is no possible universe that exists without God.
3. The Ontological Argument is logically sound and the conclusion is inevitable if one agrees that it is merely possible that God exists.
4. Therefore, premise 1 is false.
Anything else is logically absurd really. Nonetheless, suppose we push inconvenient logic to one side for a minute:
These are a lot like the "opposites" of some of the greatest proofs of God's existence. For example, the Moral Argument gives us good reason to believe our moral values and duties have an objective source. The Kalam Cosmological Argument states that if the universe began to exist, then it was caused to exist. The Fine Tuning Argument gives us a reasonable alternative to chance and necessity for explaining the fine tuning of the universe's constants and other facets. The Ontological Argument states that if it is possible that God exists, then God actually does exist.