News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Gödel's Incompleteness Theorems (2015). Parent comment

Re:Gödel's Incompleteness Theorems (2015) by throwaway729 on Tuesday April 04, 2017 @08:56PM (#14038750)
> The main problem with ontological arguments (and why, even as a Christian, I don't like them) is because they seem to embed the conclusion in their first premise

But that is also true of the informal rhetorical arguments that are more common in (christian) apologetics.

The gift of formal proofs is that they make explicit and unavoidable this embedding of conclusion in premise, which is fundamental to all (epistemologically rational) apologetics

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Gödel's Incompleteness Theorems (2015) by dvt on Tuesday April 04, 2017 @10:53PM (#14039284)
> this embedding of conclusion in premise [...] is fundamental to all (epistemologically rational) apologetics

It might be true of all ontological arguments, but certainly not all apologetic arguments.

[ Parent | on HN ]