The Ontological Argument

The ontological argument is another argument put forward to try to say that God exists. It goes like this,

1) God is perceived as a being of perfection.
2) Existence is apart of being perfect.
3) If God did not exist he would in fact not be a perfect being.
4) Thus by necessity, God exists.



Is an argument like this really that valid? Is a play on words that could perhaps add up on a logical level, be sufficient to establish God's existence?

The Cosmological Argument

When I used to argue with a Rabbi that I know, all he would say is ..... ooohh who created evolution? Oh, who created the big bang? Everything created must have a creator! Right? Are we sure? O.o Anyways this line of reasoning invites the contradiction of who created God, which is a contradiction that could be handled if the rabbi were to have taken a real philosophy class.

The cosmological argument goes like this-

1) The universe is in motion.

2) Everything in motion has to have something putting it in motion.

3) It is impossible for point 2 to be an infinite process because then there would be no first mover in the first place and thus no motion in the universe at all.

4) Thus by necessity, something infinite had to have already existed in order to create the finite physical universe.


Can we really be sure by merely an a priori method that the universe is finite? Or that time is finite? What if the universe goes through an endless process of expansion and contraction and expansion again? Can the cosmological argument in fact be the truth, except as a natural process and not in a theological way? Are we absolutely sure that everything in motion has to have something putting it in motion? The laws of physics could be different in different parts of the universe. We don't know. Is there a such thing as a being of pure infinity? With all this is mind, it don't mean that the cosmological argument for God is impossible. It's just not the be all end all.

SJ on Metaphysics

I often wonder about God, if he exists, and the nature of him if he does exist.

It would seem to be that it would be impossible for God to have an infinite set of powers.

1) It would seem to me that finite beings such as human beings can theoretically create more powerful beings i.e. genetic engineering and robotics. Can an infinite being create a more powerful being? I would think not. Thus an infinite being would have an element of finiteness.

2) Can God change the laws of mathematics? To put it in a simpler way, can God change 1+1 = 2 to 1+1=5? It would seem to me that even if God were to make it so that if one is added to one, five of something appears, to God 1+1 would still equal 2. It would seem to me that mathematics is a framework that God if he exists is beholden to.

It would seem to me that the idea of God is one that approaches infinity but is not pure infinity.

SJ on the Economy

Keynesian economics is back with Obama's Stimulus Bill, however that it seems to me that it may only be apart of the equation for getting the economy back up there.

I'm not an expert in economics, but to speak from an economics standpoint, a goal to me seems to be to bring the economy to an equilibrium in which maximum employment is reached, however there seems to me to be so many ways that government intervenes in the economy that warps market forces to a point that puts us further away from that equilibrium.

It might be that in order to improve the economy, people should think of ways in which government can stop intervening in the private sector and thus stop holding back the free market.

Obama is a Dope

I don't normally comment on politics but Obama is a total dope.

on March 1 or 2 or whatever the Obama administration told Russia that " Russian help in resolving Iran's nuclear program would make its missile shield plans for Europe unnecessary." Really? I guess no need to be prepared in case Iran or North Korea decides to launch a missile. Idiots.


Click here for news article- http://en.rian.ru/russia/20090302/120375219.html