Modal ontological argument AGAINST God

[tobias]

Was having a conversation with an atheist, and he proposed the following argument against God:

P1: If God exists (the MGB, maximally great being), then GodWorld is the unique BPW.
P2: If GodWorld is the unique BPW, then God would maintain GodWorld.
P3: GodWorld is false because the universe exists.
C: Therefore, God, as so defined, doesn’t exist

Basically, GodWorld is a world in which only God, the MGB, exists. If He were to create any non-God object, then that would be degrading the overall quality of the possible world by filling it with something with lesser properties, and so would be contradictory to the great-making properties of the MGB, as degrading something is a lesser-making property, as we can conceive of a being who would not degrade the overall quality. Therefore, He cannot exist.

Some responses would be great!

Godworld would simply mean God alone. This being said, the creation of a universe would in no way affect Godworld because he still simply exists. Being the MGB, how is it proposed that he is changed by less than perfect beings or the existence of matter or space? If the point is that God would have a ‘need’ for imperfect beings, that would in no way indicate a ‘change’ in the MGB, it points to what is maximally great- ‘existence’.

 

[Linux]

Nuh-uh. God is substantive being, “the act of existence” is a concept, an abstract.

Being and substantive are concepts; it doesn’t mean we are not referring to something objective.

That’s not a good analogy, because there it’s about the average rather than the total purity. But isn’t God and one good person better than just God?

If God is perfect, why would it be better for there to be more?

 

[SentinelofTruth]

tobias:

This being said, the creation of a universe would in no way affect Godworld because he still simply exists.

Any “world”, by philosophical definition, includes everything that exists. Thus, GodWorld ceases to be as soon as God creates anything.

Linux:

If God is perfect, why would it be better for there to be more?

infinity+1=infinity

1=0 (impossible)
Therefore:
infinity+1>infinity

Linux:

Being and substantive are concepts; it doesn’t mean we are not referring to something objective.

“The concept of being” and “the concept of substantivity” are certainly concepts. What I meant was that substantive beings can’t be reduced to mere concepts.