Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Skepticism, Science & Pseudoscience

DetlefK

(16,578 posts)

3. Here's the paper. The premises he uses as a starting-point are highly debatable.

Reply to SoLeftIAmRight (Original post)

Tue Aug 18, 2015, 05:35 AM

Aug 2015

http://arxiv.org/abs/1308.4526

A1: Either a property or its negation is positive, but not both.
Gödel claims there is no morally grey zone. Instead everything is black and white.

A2: A property necessarily implied by a positive property is positive.
Counter-point: The dose makes the poison.

D1: A God-like being possesses all positive properties.
Why shouldn't God be able to be evil if he desires so?

A5: Necessary existence is a positive property.
Meh, I think it's better for some things to not exist. (Like friggin' sharks with friggin' lasers on their heads.)

Cannot edit, recommend, or reply in locked discussions

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

3 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Proof of God? [View all] SoLeftIAmRight Aug 2015 OP

confirmed? SoLeftIAmRight Aug 2015 #1

We've been having fun with this in the religion group.... uriel1972 Aug 2015 #2

Here's the paper. The premises he uses as a starting-point are highly debatable. DetlefK Aug 2015 #3