twoshots wrote:
I'm sorry, it seems that I misunderstood what you were saying; Embarassed I did not recognize that you were operating under the definition of God as "being as such", although I'm afraid I don't understand what this means.
I'm sorry as well,if I mislead you.
'Being' roughly can be defined as:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BeingQuote:
In ontology, the study of being, being is anything that can be said to be, either transcendentally or immanently.
Although this definition is about any individual being,therefore word 'anything'.
This individual being is part of being as such,or better Being(with capital B).
Being as such is
everything that can be said to be....that exist as totality of relationships of individual beings.
twoshots wrote:
Is this implicit in the argument?
I'm personally convinced that implication is very strong.
To illustrate this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6del ... ical_proofQuote:
Axiom 1: It is possible to single out positive properties from among all properties. Gödel defines a positive property rather vaguely: "Positive means positive in the moral aesthetic sense (independently of the accidental structure of the world)... It may also mean pure attribution as opposed to privation (or containing privation)." (Gödel 1995)
Positive is something that IS,opposite of something that isn't.
We can say that positive is something that is said to be,since 'to be' is positive statement.
If we say that something is not said to be that we mean that this something is negative.
All existing beings are BEINGS,and this is positive property (or basis of all existing properties) of ALL of them.
If ALL elements of Set (S)have property(+),S=( A(+),B(+),C(+),D(+)....n(+)),then we can conclude that S(+).
Or better yet,
if all elements are (+),we can conclude from them +.By (+) I mean 'positive' in ontological,not mathematical sense,when it have different usage.
What makes all properties existing is the fact that THEY ARE,that they have being.
Imaginary or non-material properties also exist(are beings),as a part of our minds.Those,like all existing physical beings participate in existence.If something exist,then it has to be being and being is positivity as such.
Quote:
Axiom 4: If P is a property, then either P or its negation is positive, but not both.
There can be only (+=+) or (-=-) but there can never be +=- which is logical contradiction.
If being exist,then there can never be non-being,since non-being does not exist.
Therefore everything that exist must always exist,and can never turn into-non-existence...because there can never be (+=-).
Being is therefore necessary.
Quote:
Axiom 5: Necessary existence is a positive property (Pos(NE)). This mirrors the key assumption in Anselm's argument.
Existence is positive,and because it is positive it is therefore necessary,unlike non-existence that is not necessary,since non-existence cannot exist.
Since only Being must exist,we can conclude that everything is Being,because we have eliminated possibility of non-being.
Only thing that is changeable are attributes of that Being (individual beings).
Since Being is basis of all properties (all minds,time,matter,energy,ideas,fictional subjective entities,space,time,limitation and expansion...etc) therefore all these properties participate in Being,and therefore Being as such have all these properties.
Or better yet,Being is ALL these existing properties.
Such being is by definition 'God' or 'Absolute'.
P.S
English is not my first language,so I apologize if some of my formulations may appear contrary to spirit of English language.
This is my opinion on that matter.
_________________
"All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy"
Jack Torrance
03 Jan 2008, 10:46 pm
I did not recognize that you were operating under the definition of God as "being as such", although I'm afraid I don't understand what this means. Is this implicit in the argument?
