Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that The ontological argument eliminates the second alternative — that God is possible but may or may not exist.

    ?Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.There are three logical alternatives: God is impossible, God is contingently possible, or God exists necessarily.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If God is possible, God cannot exist merely contingently, because contingent existence is incompatible with preeminence.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Therefore, if God is possible at all, God exists necessarily.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.