The greatest does not exist therefore Anselm ontological argument is wrong

Is there a God? If so, what is She like?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

bahman
Posts: 2082
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 3:52 pm

The greatest does not exist therefore Anselm ontological argument is wrong

This is the direct observation that in math the greatest does not exist (following Cantor's theorem). The ontological proof of God requires the existence of the greatest. Therefore God (defined as the greatest) does not exist.

Logik
Posts: 4048
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2018 12:48 pm

Re: The greatest does not exist therefore Anselm ontological argument is wrong

Cantor’s theorem is only valid if you assume set theory as the foundation for mathematics, but set theory is broken beyond repair which is why mathematicians have abandoned it for a while now.

Naive set theory removed the universal set from its ontology so it can rescue itself from Russel’s paradox.

ZFC has a clever workaround to avoid russel’a paradox, but it too lost the notion of a universal set.

I quite like the idea of the set of “everything” so I reject set theory and ZFC in favour of type theory.

The set of everything does not have subsets.
It has reductions.

Ultimately though. The existence of “the greatest” depends on a simple choice: which theory you assume foundational to mathematics?

If you do settle on set theory then Cantor is the way to refute Anselm.

If you accept type theory as foundational - Anselm’s argument is equivalent to a pantheistic argument.

The greatest is the Universe type.

Impenitent
Posts: 2295
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 2:04 pm

Re: The greatest does not exist therefore Anselm ontological argument is wrong

but Muhammad Ali did exist at one time

-Imp

Veritas Aequitas
Posts: 1808
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am

Re: The greatest does not exist therefore Anselm ontological argument is wrong

bahman wrote:
Sun Jan 06, 2019 9:59 pm
This is the direct observation that in math the greatest does not exist (following Cantor's theorem). The ontological proof of God requires the existence of the greatest. Therefore God (defined as the greatest) does not exist.
St. Anselm Ontological God is logically [re logic only] possible.
As you posited, it is not mathematically possible.
But as I had proven, it is empirical-rationally impossible to be real.

Since the ontological God is impossible to be empirical-rationally real, there is no question of 'God exists as real' nor 'God does not exist' because that is a non-starter, i.e. moot.

Why the idea of God emerges onto human consciousness is due to the compulsion of some terrible psychological forces driven by a real existential crisis.
The idea of God exists is only useful for psychological reasons and nothing else.

Logik
Posts: 4048
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2018 12:48 pm

Re: The greatest does not exist therefore Anselm ontological argument is wrong

Veritas Aequitas wrote:
Mon Jan 07, 2019 6:33 am
St. Anselm Ontological God is logically [re logic only] possible.
The link between logic and reality is realizers.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Realizability
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Realization_(systems)
Veritas Aequitas wrote:
Mon Jan 07, 2019 6:33 am
As you posited, it is not mathematically possible.
And as I pointed out, it is - when you throw away set theory.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_theo ... erse_types
Veritas Aequitas wrote:
Mon Jan 07, 2019 6:33 am
But as I had proven, it is empirical-rationally impossible to be real.
So you just rejected The Universe.

attofishpi
Posts: 3254
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
Location: Orion Spur
Contact:

Re: The greatest does not exist therefore Anselm ontological argument is wrong

Logik wrote:
Mon Jan 07, 2019 7:47 am
Veritas Aequitas wrote:
Mon Jan 07, 2019 6:33 am
St. Anselm Ontological God is logically [re logic only] possible.
The link between logic and reality is realizers.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Realizability
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Realization_(systems)
Veritas Aequitas wrote:
Mon Jan 07, 2019 6:33 am
As you posited, it is not mathematically possible.
And as I pointed out, it is - when you throw away set theory.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_theo ... erse_types
Veritas Aequitas wrote:
Mon Jan 07, 2019 6:33 am
But as I had proven, it is empirical-rationally impossible to be real.
So you just rejected The Universe.
Logik, keep up the good work of being rational. Last week you caught me after half a carton, where I left feeling my mind had been raped, still it was quick and a blast.

Logik
Posts: 4048
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2018 12:48 pm

Re: The greatest does not exist therefore Anselm ontological argument is wrong

attofishpi wrote:
Mon Jan 07, 2019 8:48 am
Logik wrote:
Mon Jan 07, 2019 7:47 am
Veritas Aequitas wrote:
Mon Jan 07, 2019 6:33 am
St. Anselm Ontological God is logically [re logic only] possible.
The link between logic and reality is realizers.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Realizability
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Realization_(systems)
Veritas Aequitas wrote:
Mon Jan 07, 2019 6:33 am
As you posited, it is not mathematically possible.
And as I pointed out, it is - when you throw away set theory.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_theo ... erse_types
Veritas Aequitas wrote:
Mon Jan 07, 2019 6:33 am
But as I had proven, it is empirical-rationally impossible to be real.
So you just rejected The Universe.
Logik, keep up the good work of being rational. Last week you caught me after half a carton, where I left feeling my mind had been raped, still it was quick and a blast.

We are all in the same sinking boat.
Everyone benefits by having smarter people.

attofishpi
Posts: 3254
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
Location: Orion Spur
Contact:

Re: The greatest does not exist therefore Anselm ontological argument is wrong

Logik wrote:
Mon Jan 07, 2019 9:53 am
Everyone benefits by having smarter people.
mmm...not so sure I consider you smarter. Perhaps more knowledgeable in some areas..and there I benefit.

Logik
Posts: 4048
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2018 12:48 pm

Re: The greatest does not exist therefore Anselm ontological argument is wrong

attofishpi wrote:
Mon Jan 07, 2019 10:14 am
Logik wrote:
Mon Jan 07, 2019 9:53 am
Everyone benefits by having smarter people.
mmm...not so sure I consider you smarter. Perhaps more knowledgeable in some areas..and there I benefit.

If you learned something you became smarter.
If I learned something I became smarter.

Nett win for everyone.

bahman
Posts: 2082
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 3:52 pm

Re: The greatest does not exist therefore Anselm ontological argument is wrong

Logik wrote:
Sun Jan 06, 2019 10:18 pm
Cantor’s theorem is only valid if you assume set theory as the foundation for mathematics, but set theory is broken beyond repair which is why mathematicians have abandoned it for a while now.

Naive set theory removed the universal set from its ontology so it can rescue itself from Russel’s paradox.

ZFC has a clever workaround to avoid russel’a paradox, but it too lost the notion of a universal set.
Who is ZFC?
Logik wrote:
Sun Jan 06, 2019 10:18 pm
I quite like the idea of the set of “everything” so I reject set theory and ZFC in favour of type theory.
Does the greatest possible exists in type theory?
Logik wrote:
Sun Jan 06, 2019 10:18 pm
The set of everything does not have subsets.
It has reductions.
What do you mean?
Logik wrote:
Sun Jan 06, 2019 10:18 pm
Ultimately though. The existence of “the greatest” depends on a simple choice: which theory you assume foundational to mathematics?

If you do settle on set theory then Cantor is the way to refute Anselm.

If you accept type theory as foundational - Anselm’s argument is equivalent to a pantheistic argument.

The greatest is the Universe type.
Of course God is not the universe since we are persons living in the universe.

bahman
Posts: 2082
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 3:52 pm

Re: The greatest does not exist therefore Anselm ontological argument is wrong

Impenitent wrote:
Sun Jan 06, 2019 11:49 pm
but Muhammad Ali did exist at one time

-Imp
You are correct. I should have said the greatest imaginable. The greatest exists for any instance at any given time.

Logik
Posts: 4048
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2018 12:48 pm

Re: The greatest does not exist therefore Anselm ontological argument is wrong

bahman wrote:
Mon Jan 07, 2019 3:09 pm
Who is ZFC?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zermelo%E ... set_theory
bahman wrote:
Mon Jan 07, 2019 3:09 pm
Does the greatest possible exists in type theory?
The "greatest possible" is always a conceptual notion. Type theory has a "Universe" type.

You can always conceptualise two universes, but that is "illegal" in type theory because The Universe is a Singleton.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singleton_pattern

If you wanted to speak about Universes (plural) you will run into contradictions (because you are violating the grammar and starting assumption of Type Theory - there is only one universe). You will end up exactly like Cantor and exactly like Russel's paradox. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/System_U#Girard's_paradox
bahman wrote:
Mon Jan 07, 2019 3:09 pm
What do you mean?
I mean a cat is not a subset of The Universe.. A cat is a type of thing within the set which is The Universe.
bahman wrote:
Mon Jan 07, 2019 3:09 pm
Of course God is not the universe since we are persons living in the universe.
OK, but if The Universe is the greatest set (set of everything) you can conceptualise, claiming that "God is not the universe" is either a:
* Contradiction, for (Universe + God) > Universe
OR
* God is a type of thing in the Universe.
Last edited by Logik on Mon Jan 07, 2019 3:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.

bahman
Posts: 2082
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 3:52 pm

Re: The greatest does not exist therefore Anselm ontological argument is wrong

Veritas Aequitas wrote:
Mon Jan 07, 2019 6:33 am
bahman wrote:
Sun Jan 06, 2019 9:59 pm
This is the direct observation that in math the greatest does not exist (following Cantor's theorem). The ontological proof of God requires the existence of the greatest. Therefore God (defined as the greatest) does not exist.
St. Anselm Ontological God is logically [re logic only] possible.
As you posited, it is not mathematically possible.
But as I had proven, it is empirical-rationally impossible to be real.

Since the ontological God is impossible to be empirical-rationally real, there is no question of 'God exists as real' nor 'God does not exist' because that is a non-starter, i.e. moot.

Why the idea of God emerges onto human consciousness is due to the compulsion of some terrible psychological forces driven by a real existential crisis.
The idea of God exists is only useful for psychological reasons and nothing else.
The greatest exists for any instance at any given time. The greatest imaginable, the absolute, does not exist. I had to be more precise.

Logik
Posts: 4048
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2018 12:48 pm

Re: The greatest does not exist therefore Anselm ontological argument is wrong

bahman wrote:
Mon Jan 07, 2019 3:18 pm
The greatest exists for any instance at any given time. The greatest imaginable, the absolute, does not exist. I had to be more precise.
Then your mindset is incompatible with naive set theory. In order to avoid Russel's paradox - the "Greatest" (universal set) was discarded.

Because we are bounded rationalists whatever is claimed to be "The Greatest" - I can simply imagine two of them...

If God is the greatest, then two Gods are greater. And If you can imagine one God, you sure can imagine two!

The whole point of Anselm's argument is to establish an ontological upper bound. The line where reality ends and imagination begins.

bahman
Posts: 2082
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 3:52 pm

Re: The greatest does not exist therefore Anselm ontological argument is wrong

Logik wrote:
Mon Jan 07, 2019 3:17 pm
bahman wrote:
Mon Jan 07, 2019 3:09 pm
Who is ZFC?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zermelo%E ... set_theory
Thanks.
Logik wrote:
Mon Jan 07, 2019 3:17 pm
bahman wrote:
Mon Jan 07, 2019 3:09 pm
Does the greatest possible exists in type theory?
The "greatest possible" is always a conceptual notion. Type theory has a "Universe" type.

You can always conceptualise two universes, but that is "illegal" in type theory because The Universe is a Singleton.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singleton_pattern
Logik wrote:
Mon Jan 07, 2019 3:17 pm
If you wanted to speak about Universes (plural) you will run into contradictions (because you are violating the grammar and starting assumption of Type Theory - there is only one universe). You will end up exactly like Cantor and exactly like Russel's paradox. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/System_U#Girard's_paradox
I see and thanks.
Logik wrote:
Mon Jan 07, 2019 3:17 pm
bahman wrote:
Mon Jan 07, 2019 3:09 pm
What do you mean?
I mean a cat is not a subset of The Universe.. A cat is a type of thing within the set which is The Universe.
I see and thanks.
Logik wrote:
Mon Jan 07, 2019 3:17 pm
bahman wrote:
Mon Jan 07, 2019 3:09 pm
Of course God is not the universe since we are persons living in the universe.
OK, but if The Universe is the greatest set (set of everything) you can conceptualise, claiming that "God is not the universe" is either a:
* Contradiction, for (Universe + God) > Universe
OR
* God is a type of thing in the Universe.
So God is not greatest imaginable again, the absolute.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Dachshund and 4 guests