What I know...
Okay, to simplify this...imagine the number 18-20 is the average strength of a decent team, with 21 being a solidly good team and 25 being a playoff caliber contestant. 30+ is reserved for teams playing at a championship level. That's your background.
Here's how a few of the top...
That's very complicated, but my response isn't. Again, I'm not arguing Anselm's part. I'm saying that irrespective of Anselm's argument, his definition of God so far as I've advanced it remains a solid enough response to the inquiry, "What do you mean by God?" Well, provided that's what you...
I think it can be argued that it is only better, or good, for God to exist. And then the complications begin. If God is perfect then how can He introduce the imperfect from His nature? Or, does the creation of the imperfect itself argue against the perfection of God, assuming the foundation. I...
And in doing that he makes one assumption that is the actual problem with his advance, the assertion that existence is superior to non-being. It's a valuation that can't be said to be objectively true.
It's an interesting point that mostly serves to suggest the term shouldn't be applied to...
No more or less than any other.
You mean attempted to, but I'm not arguing Anselm's argument for God's existence, only noting that when I speak of God I am speaking of that definition to which Anselm's argument attaches.
I've read Kant and the rejections that followed him as they...
All words are symbolic and every word relies, to one degree or another, on experience. But Anselm's description is a fairly straight forward answer to the question.
A being in the literal sense of having existence. We don't have to and in fact can't encompass Anselm's God.
Or you misapprehend...
I understand that you're upset, but what you're doing there isn't rational and won't, can't really amount to much. People who feel their way through it the way you're doing will doubtless congratulate you on a penetrating vision. People of faith will, hopefully, shrug and consider that maybe...
It's an interesting definition, but Anselm in using greater implies perfection. I don't think of the devil as the most imperfect being, or perfectly imperfect, if you would. You could define him as a being in perfect opposition to God.
Anselm was speaking to the God of Abraham, as am I. Offering that description at the end only serves to let me know that no matter how reasonable you begin, your bias is steeped in the emotional. Judging my God is pointless. Either He isn't, in which case you're wasting time, or He's beyond...
I'd start with Anselm for the general qualification: "a being than which nothing greater can be conceived." The perfection that scale itself points to.
It's not really much of a riddle or argument though. It's a series of unsupported assumptions about God. None of it necessarily follows.
If you're going to say God and by that mean a being whose capacity and expression are sufficient to create the order and mechanism of our reality, then...
Harmless flirting is part of a lot of social interaction. If there's an overture in it the trick is to recognize the value in the compliment and turn it aside gently, with appreciation. I mean if you're not interested in more than the flirtation, of course...No sense in hurting anyone's feelings...
The 90s
1. Shawshank Redemption: hits all the notes with a degree of subtle originality that makes the sum of this movie a thing far surpassing its parts...and has one of the best closing narrations in film.
2. Pulp Fiction: for a long time it was arguably the best thing Tarantino had offered...
Well, the Baltimore and Giants are essentially pick'em games. Dallas and Philly are reaches, but I can see either or both losing while sabotaging the points. If I was betting real money I'd probably limit it to one of the two.