Thanks for your objection - that is the spirit of philosophy.Peter Holmes wrote: ↑Sat Jul 15, 2023 9:05 amHere's your argument:Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Sat Jul 15, 2023 8:49 amDo you have a counter for my argument?Peter Holmes wrote: ↑Sat Jul 15, 2023 8:36 am But I disagree with VA that the existence of supernatural things - specifically gods - is an impossibility, because that claim incurs a burden of proof which, as I see it, can't be met. So I think the rational position is disbelief, pending evidence.
It is Impossible for God to be Real
viewtopic.php?t=40229
P1. For all theists, God must be absolutely perfect and existing as real.
P2. But, Absolute perfection is impossible to exists as real. [sic]
C1. Therefore it is impossible for God to exists real. [sic]
This mistakes the abstract nouns absoluteness and perfection for things of some kind that, therefore, may or may not exist, or whose existence may be impossible. And that's an ancient philosophical delusion.
In descriptive contexts, we can use them and their cognates perfectly rationally. For example:
The meal was perfect.
Her testimony was absolutely truthful.
Did you read the following note at the bottom of the OP?
- "Note:
The next 3 posts below are critical to the OP."
Strawman again.
I did not use absoluteness [noun] in this case. I stated 'absolute' as an adjective.
It is the theists who claim 'absolute perfection' for their God, not me.
In any case, isn't that the mistake of the theists who made such claims, thus they are indulging in an illusion [not real]?
Therefore it is impossible for God to exists as real.
It is not restricted to an ancient philosophical delusion but it is even delusional at the present
In post#2, I defined "what is real"
- 2. Reality:
What is real, facts, truths, knowledge and objectivity are conditioned upon a specific human based Framework and System of Reality [FSR] and Knowledge [FSK].
The most credible, reliable and objective at present is the human and empirically-based Scientific-FSK as the standard at 100.
The lesser credible and objective FSKs are, e.g. the theistic FSK based on faith is merely 0.001 of the standard.
Reality is all-there-is, 'all' includes all person[s] in existence.
What is real is Empirical Realism [Kantian aka Transcendental Idealism] which is in contrast to Philosophical Realism, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophical_realism
"[Philosophical] Realism can also be a view about the properties of reality in general, holding that reality exists independent of the mind, as opposed to non-realist views."
As such what is real must be empirically verifiable and justifiable plus supported by the finest philosophical reasonings.
Thus your grounding is delusional and has no credibility to deny human-based objective FSK-ed moral facts.