No-reason argument

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
m (Fixed spelling error.)
Line 5: Line 5:
 
This argument is built on an inadequate human understanding of "perfection". As humans, we have no understanding of what it means to be perfect. We have ideas of what perfection ought to look like, but these are merely social constructs. To say that 'one who is perfect does not need' is an implication that cannot be argued for or against. Humans have no understanding of this notion; thus this is an argument built on insufficient premises.  
 
This argument is built on an inadequate human understanding of "perfection". As humans, we have no understanding of what it means to be perfect. We have ideas of what perfection ought to look like, but these are merely social constructs. To say that 'one who is perfect does not need' is an implication that cannot be argued for or against. Humans have no understanding of this notion; thus this is an argument built on insufficient premises.  
  
{{Arguments against god}}
+
The "No-Reason" argument clearly invalid considering we can only observe the idea of perfection from an anthropocentric view, meaning that we can only view perfection as we understand it. We do not have the capability to understand it as a perfect god is.
[[Category:Inductive arguments]]
+

Revision as of 19:02, 13 May 2011


"The "No Reason" argument states that a perfect god would have no desire to create the universe since the very state of perfection carries with it the implication that one has everything one needs or wants. Thus, the Christian god is the "perfect" victim of this argument."

This argument is built on an inadequate human understanding of "perfection". As humans, we have no understanding of what it means to be perfect. We have ideas of what perfection ought to look like, but these are merely social constructs. To say that 'one who is perfect does not need' is an implication that cannot be argued for or against. Humans have no understanding of this notion; thus this is an argument built on insufficient premises.

The "No-Reason" argument clearly invalid considering we can only observe the idea of perfection from an anthropocentric view, meaning that we can only view perfection as we understand it. We do not have the capability to understand it as a perfect god is.

Personal tools
Namespaces
Variants
Actions
wiki navigation
IronChariots.Org
Toolbox