P2. Absolute Perfection is Impossible to Exists as Real

[Veritas Aequitas]

Here is the argument why
P2. Absolute Perfection is impossible to exists as Real

My Full Argument:
Why God must be absolutely Perfect
viewtopic.php?t=40229

• i. All humans are programmed with an innate unavoidable existential crisis that generate terrible primal cognitive dissonance.
  ii. The critical task for all humans is to soothe the cognitive dissonances.
  iii. For theists [major types], the only balm to immediately soothe the cognitive dissonance is, an invention of an absolutely perfect God.

ETA: an invention based on faith, i.e. no empirically verified proofs

It is impossible for God to exists as real

• P1. For [major types] theists, God must be absolutely perfect and existing as real [i.],
  P2. But, Absolute perfection is impossible to exists as real
  C1. Therefore it is impossible for God to exists real.

Again, given the fact that science cannot deal with absolute entities then your second premise does not follow. You need a separate argument for P2 to show that it is true.
viewtopic.php?p=650340#p650340

I differentiated between Relative Perfection and Absolute Perfection here;
viewtopic.php?p=647893#p647893

P2. Absolute Perfection is impossible to exists as Real

1. What exists as real, is factual, true, knowledge, objective is conditioned upon a specific human-based FSK, of which the human based scientific FSK is the most credible, reliable, and objective.
Thus what is sufficiently real must be verified and justified via the human-based scientific FSK.

2. The human-based scientific FSK encompass and exhaust all that is real or possibly to be the most real.

• ..encompasses: matter, but also energy, physical laws, space, time, structure, physical processes, information, state, and forces, among other things, as described by physics and other sciences ..
  even abstract concepts such as mathematics, morality, consciousness, intentionality, and meaning are considered physical entities, although they may consist of a large ontological object and a causally complex structure. Nevertheless, they are still considered physical.
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physicalism

3. All the major theistic beliefs claim their God to be of absolute perfection thus cannot be within the ambit of the human-based scientific FSK.

4. Since 2, The human-based scientific FSK encompass and exhaust all that is most real or possibly to be the most real. In a way, the human-based scientific FSK is the ONLY way, things can be confirmed as real.

5. There is no other human-based FSK that is more reliable than the human based FSK to confirm the emergence and realization of reality at present. Mathematics and logic are merely tools of the science and other FSKs.

6. Thus it is impossible for the absolute perfect God to be real. [3, 4, 5]

7. C1. Therefore it is impossible for an absolutely perfect God to exists real.

[Veritas Aequitas]

Notes: KIV

[Age]

Considering so-called 'absolute perfection' ALREADY exists, and ALWAYS does, then the CLAIM here above is OBVIOUSLY False, Wrong, AND Incorrect, and could NOT be MORE False, MORE Wrong, AND MORE Incorrect.

[FlashDangerpants]

My Full Argument:
Why God must be absolutely Perfect
viewtopic.php?t=40229

• i. All humans are programmed with an innate unavoidable existential crisis that generate terrible primal cognitive dissonance.
  ii. The critical task for all humans is to soothe the cognitive dissonances.
  iii. For theists [major types], the only balm to soothe the cognitive dissonance is an absolutely perfect God.

That's deductively invalid.

The inference potentially works only if you make clear the unwritten assumption that the a God-constructed-by-humans would need to be AP on the basis of human needs for soothing certain feelings. But a God who already existed can be anything he wants and if he constructed humans to need something else than what he is, that's not a logical impossiblity at all.

Your whole argument is complete worthless dog shit. Improve for fuck's sake. A decade of this effort you have put in should bring less pathetic results.

[Veritas Aequitas]

My argument below is not meant to be a deductive syllogism, but argued from a series of cause to effect.

i. All humans are programmed with an innate unavoidable existential crisis that generate terrible primal cognitive dissonance.
ii. The critical task for all humans is to soothe the cognitive dissonances.
iii. For theists [major types], the only balm to immediately soothe the cognitive dissonance is, an invention of an absolutely perfect God.

ETA: an invention based on faith, i.e. no empirically verified proofs

There is no pre-existing God.
God is an invention [based on faith, unverified by empirical proofs] by theists to enable them to have immediate relief from the inherent cognitive dissonance that is imbued in all humans from an existential crisis via evolution.

Any feedback on the above?

[FlashDangerpants]

My argument below is not meant to be a deductive syllogism, but argued from a series of cause to effect.

That's kinda dumb. You require this thing to be one of your imputs into the P1 of your next argument, so now you must downgrade that argument along with this one.

These are rookie mistakes you are making.