Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
If he go farther, and, after an investigation into the nature and reach of human knowledge, ending in the conclusion that the existence of God is incapable of proof, cease to believe in it on the ground that he cannot know it to be true, he is an agnostic and also an atheist, an agnostic-atheist—an atheist because an agnostic."
According to atheist philosopher Quentin Smith, "a count of the articles in the philosophy journals shows that more articles have been published about Craig's defense of the Kalam argument than have been published about any other philosopher's contemporary formulation of an argument for God's existence." [20]
Gödel's ontological proof is a formal argument by the mathematician Kurt Gödel (1906–1978) for the existence of God. The argument is in a line of development that goes back to Anselm of Canterbury (1033–1109).
God, as a being that is maximally great, must hence exist necessarily. It is possible that (i.e. there is a possible world where) God, a maximally great being, exists. If God exists in that world, then, being maximally great, God exists in every world. Hence, God also exists in the actual world and does so with necessity. [45] [47]
At the turn of the 14th century, medieval Christian theologian Duns Scotus (1265/66–1308) formulated a metaphysical argument for the existence of God inspired by Aquinas's argument of the unmoved mover. [37] Like other philosophers and theologians, Scotus believed that his statement for God's existence could be considered distinct to that of ...
The argument from consciousness is an argument for the existence of God that claims characteristics of human consciousness (such as qualia) cannot be explained by the physical mechanisms of the human body and brain, therefore asserting that there must be non-physical aspects to human consciousness.
Ward defended the utility of the five ways (for instance, on the fourth argument he states that all possible smells must pre-exist in the mind of God, but that God, being by his nature non-physical, does not himself stink) whilst pointing out that they only constitute a proof of God if one first begins with a proposition that the universe can ...
Therefore, God either did not create these organisms or is not omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent. Also called the "dysteleological argument". Argument from Lack of Evidence – There is no conclusive evidence for the existence of God and therefore it is reasonable to conclude that God does not exist.