> I add: BTW is there anybody out there (e.g. Justin) who can briefly
> explain Kurt Godel's ontological argument for the existence of God to
> me in? I studied foo-foo Continental and Ancient Phil and can't handle
> the modal logic. Stick a modal operator in there and I am lost.
I downloaded something on that argument from somewhere a while ago and it is sitting on my hard disk awaiting my perusal; if I can get the time soon, I'll have a look at it. However, I doubt that it will prove any sounder (valid argument with true premises) than any other one I have seen.
Modal logic is no big problem -- just add "necessary" and "possible" to ordinary symbolic logic. (Well, there's a bit more to it ...)
> I was really blown away to discover relatively recently that Godel was
> a mystic. I think there is a point at which it is very easy for
> positivistic/nominalistic approaches to pass over into mysticism (Hume
> inspiring Schleirmacher, Wittgenstein).
Sure -- the positivistic/nominalistic standpoint wipes out rationalist bases for theology, so if you have the temperament to hook up emotionally with God (i.e., be a mystic), the field is clear.
Jon Johanning // jjohanning at igc.org __________________________________ A sympathetic Scot summed it all up very neatly in the remark, 'You should make a point of trying every experience once, excepting incest and folk-dancing.' -- Sir Arnold Bax