I did not use a reversed proposition, ◊□A→A can be proven from A→□◊A.

Do you really need me to type out the proof?



Wow that's almost opposite of what it is.

1. definition of a newly created variable
2. definition ^
3. premise

If A exists, then A is necessarily possible.

If A is possibly necessary, A exists


However you leave out the possibly when declaring its existence, so yes, please point to the proof. It seems to be stuck on the fact that A MIGHT be necessary, but it might not. It's possible A is necessary, but it still could not be necessary.

This post was edited by Thor123422 on Oct 12 2012 11:53pm

y u no respond

Sorry, getting all the easy ones out of the way first.

1. A being has maximal excellence in a given possible world W if and only if it is omnipotent, omniscient and wholly good in W; and <- definition
2. A being has maximal greatness if it has maximal excellence in every possible world. <- definition


with those wishy washy definitions, my dog might qualify

my dog might be omnipotent, since we have nothing omnipotent to compare my dog too.......
my dog might be omniscient, since we have nothing omniscient to compare my dog too.......
my dog might be wholly good, since i got no friggin idea what that even means....
my dog might exist in every possible world, since I have no way of checking.....

This post was edited by Azrad on Oct 13 2012 12:01am

I'm very tired and about to go to bed but I think Aquinas' cosmological argument is one of the better ones for the existence of a god or at least an uncaused something that itself caused all this.

Theology is an interesting subject in philosophy. I lean more toward the radical theologians like Tillich or Kierkegaard myself but Thomas Aquinas was so far ahead of his time he really is one of the greatest philosophers of all time.