Video on the modal ontological argument

Counter Apologist has a video on the modal ontological argument, where he does a nice job of laying out some points I’ve made several times, as well as discussing possible responses to the Greatest Possible Demon objection:

Slavery abolition and animal rights: the biggest problem
When passing a law is the easy route
My debate with Randal Rauser is out!
Kris Komarnitsky’s Doubting Jesus’ Resurrection
  • Darren

    Nice, thanks.

  • Counter Apologist

    Just want to say thanks for putting this up, it’s hard to get started in this whole blogging thing.

    • Patrick

      Any particular reason you went with a demon counter example, and not something like this?

      By definition, if God exists, then God is a necessary being.
      Therefore, if God exists, then God exists in all possible worlds.
      God possibly does not exist.
      Therefore, at least one possible world exists in which God does not exist.
      Therefore God does not exist.

      The drafting of the above could undoubtedly be improved upon. But as far as I can tell, it exhibits the same flaws as the original modal ontological argument, so it illustrates the point properly. Its premise “God possibly does not exist” serves to force the apologist to either accept the premise, in which case the ontological argument implodes, or else deny that it is even possible for God not to exist. If the latter, then the apologist concedes that the ontological argument only works if you begin by denying the possibility of God’s non existence as a premise. But since that is also the ontological argument’s conclusion, the argument is just circular reasoning.

  • MNb

    Well done, Counterapologist. Usually I actively dislike video’s simply because I learn much faster by watchine and reading than by listening. What’s more, I’m not a native English speaker. So I feel as if you have chosen this format – I am thinking of including the texts – especially for me.
    I already had understood the Gread Demon counterargument in its full consequences, so it is nice to see it confirmed. I hadn’t thought about the mathematical equivalence though and as I teach that subject I didn’t have any problem with it.
    So afaIc the Ontological Argument is done with. That’s very satisfying.

    • Counter Apologist

      Check the description box, I’m including the script for each video on my blog so it’s easier to follow if video is a bad format for you.