D
Duder
Guest
.
Greetings, all -
I found this in an old shopworn copy of Norman Malcom's Essays and Lectures (1962). Follow along, if you can, and I'll describe Malcom's proof. It's rather elegant, I think!
Definition
This is a logical argument that seeks to demonstrate the necessary existence of God. As with all such arguments, we need to define the object we are arguing about. Let's start by adopting old St.. Anselm's definition of God:
.............."God is the being greater than which nothing
..............can be conceived."
In other words, you cannot imagine anything greater than God. If you can imagine something greater than the thing you are thinking about, then you are not thinking about God. God is the greatest conceivable being.
The Argument
One statement we can make about God that is obviously true is, "He either exists or He doesn't." Surprisingly, there are some things we can deduce from analyzing these two alternatives.
If God does exist, then he must have always existed, and he will have to exist forever and ever. He never came into being at some time in the past, and he will never stop existing. This would have to be true, because of our definition. When we say "God", we mean the greatest conceivable being. And since an eternal being would be greater than a temporary one, our God would have to exist at all times, if he exists at all. In other words, God would be necessary.
If God does not exist, then he never did exist and he never will. Why? Again, it follows from our definition of God as the greatest conceivable being. The greatest being would be eternal. So if the greatest being exists, he cannot exist at some times and not others. If he doesn't exist now, he never did and he never will. In other words, if God does not exist, then he is impossible.
God, then, is either necessary or impossible, One and only one of those alternatives is true. If we could eliminate one of those alternatives, then the other one would have to be right. So let's try to eliminate one.
Consider how we know it when a thing is impossible. If I were to claim that a herd of elephants is at this moment stampeding through the White House, would that be impossible? No. It would be very unlikely, but you can imagine a scenario where it could happen. It is not impossible. But what if I told you that my solid yellow socks are navy blue? Is that impossible? Yes. My claim is self-contradictory and logically absurd - so there is zero chance of it being true. It is impossible.
What that illustrates is, for a thing to be impossible it must be self-contradictory and logically absurd. Otherwise, it could happen.
Now, consider the claim "God exists". Is that impossible? Perhaps you think it is very, very unlikely that God exists. But even so, I think you will have to acknowledge that there is nothing self-contradictory or logically absurd in the claim "God exists". He could exist. Since the claim affirming his existence is not absurd, God is not impossible.
We said above that God is either necessary or impossible. We have just shown that God is not impossible. The inescapable conclusion is that God is necessary. He cannot not exist.
..............God is either necessary or impossible.
..............God is not impossible.
..............Therefore, God is necessary.
.
.
Greetings, all -
I found this in an old shopworn copy of Norman Malcom's Essays and Lectures (1962). Follow along, if you can, and I'll describe Malcom's proof. It's rather elegant, I think!
Definition
This is a logical argument that seeks to demonstrate the necessary existence of God. As with all such arguments, we need to define the object we are arguing about. Let's start by adopting old St.. Anselm's definition of God:
.............."God is the being greater than which nothing
..............can be conceived."
In other words, you cannot imagine anything greater than God. If you can imagine something greater than the thing you are thinking about, then you are not thinking about God. God is the greatest conceivable being.
The Argument
One statement we can make about God that is obviously true is, "He either exists or He doesn't." Surprisingly, there are some things we can deduce from analyzing these two alternatives.
If God does exist, then he must have always existed, and he will have to exist forever and ever. He never came into being at some time in the past, and he will never stop existing. This would have to be true, because of our definition. When we say "God", we mean the greatest conceivable being. And since an eternal being would be greater than a temporary one, our God would have to exist at all times, if he exists at all. In other words, God would be necessary.
If God does not exist, then he never did exist and he never will. Why? Again, it follows from our definition of God as the greatest conceivable being. The greatest being would be eternal. So if the greatest being exists, he cannot exist at some times and not others. If he doesn't exist now, he never did and he never will. In other words, if God does not exist, then he is impossible.
God, then, is either necessary or impossible, One and only one of those alternatives is true. If we could eliminate one of those alternatives, then the other one would have to be right. So let's try to eliminate one.
Consider how we know it when a thing is impossible. If I were to claim that a herd of elephants is at this moment stampeding through the White House, would that be impossible? No. It would be very unlikely, but you can imagine a scenario where it could happen. It is not impossible. But what if I told you that my solid yellow socks are navy blue? Is that impossible? Yes. My claim is self-contradictory and logically absurd - so there is zero chance of it being true. It is impossible.
What that illustrates is, for a thing to be impossible it must be self-contradictory and logically absurd. Otherwise, it could happen.
Now, consider the claim "God exists". Is that impossible? Perhaps you think it is very, very unlikely that God exists. But even so, I think you will have to acknowledge that there is nothing self-contradictory or logically absurd in the claim "God exists". He could exist. Since the claim affirming his existence is not absurd, God is not impossible.
We said above that God is either necessary or impossible. We have just shown that God is not impossible. The inescapable conclusion is that God is necessary. He cannot not exist.
..............God is either necessary or impossible.
..............God is not impossible.
..............Therefore, God is necessary.
.
.