@FedUpAmerican,
FedUpAmerican;35926 wrote:Enlighten us. :wtf:
Ok, so we first define God. Since "God" is personified differently in different cultures, for our purposes we will define "god" as "that which no greater can be concieved", since "god" allegedly refers to the supreme being in the universe.
Now, we know that two types of existence occur in the universe; the reality and the imaginary. Chairs exist in reality whereas ideas (liberty, morality, etc) exist in the imaginary or "understanding" (meaning they can be comprehended but not touched or created). We can further agree that, when concerning existence, that which exists in reality is greater than that which exists in the imaginary yes? I base this on the idea that a realistc existence is more readily proven than an imaginary one.
Ok, so if we agree on the loose definition of "god" as "that which no greater can be concieved", and we agree that that which exists in reality has a greater substantive existence than that which exists in the imaginary, we can now confirm that "god" exists:
The idea of "god" can be understood regardless of belief, and so it exists in the imaginary. Now, if "god" is that which no greater can be concieved, and that which exists in reality is greater than that which exists in the imaginary, "god" MUST exist in the reality.
Edit:
This is the ontological argument, I didn't come up with this logic (wish I had).