Kantology: Addressing Kant and the Ontological Argument

"You can learn the easy way or you can learn the hard way, but taking the easy way will become hard and taking the hard way will become easy... Is this Ontological?"

The problem with Kant's assertion is that he never affirms the negative. His argument follows as this: "If I say a triangle exists and I also believe in exactly three connecting angles, I am saying the same thing – a triangle and its property." If I deny one concept I am in contradiction of the other (ie. I can't say I believe in a triangle while not believing in three connecting angles). But, if you deny the triangle in its totality then you can deny both without contradiction. If a triangle does not exist, then the properties of triangles (three connecting angles) do not exist either. Thus denying the existence of God in its totality will have no outside contradictions. So what is the problem? Kant cannot say, "God does not exist."

Kant states that the problem with Anselm's argument is that the affirmation of a deity and then proposing that this deity must exist is similar to the argument of the triangle. If you assume the existence of a triangle it is only logical to assume the existence of three connecting angles. So if God exists, then the rational conclusion is that He must be the greatest imaginable being. That is fallible. But before we travel any further, what does Kant offer to deny Anslem's argument? What idea does he have that does not externally or internally contradict Anslem's presupposition? Nothing. If, for a moment, Kant assumes that God does not exist, and then says "there is no outside argument to contradict that statement." We must say "Of course!" It is only logical to say, "If a triangle does not exist, then there are not three angles." So if God does not exist it only makes sense that He cannot be the greatest imaginable being. Again, the assumption is fallible and you are left with the same paradox... An issue of assumptions.

So why does the Ontological Argument still exists as both an exotic and rare argument if it suffers an apparent paradox? The paradoxes of both Kant and Anslem stand upon different corners - one paradox is not accepted and the other is. Kant's paradox rests upon an attempt to unglue Anslem by a straight-out denial of God (which assumes the non-existence of God - a paradoxical argument, which, of course, Kant understands and thus refuses to use such terms), whereas Anslem begins his paradox with the assumption of the existence of the human intellect (an excepted paradox of the Mind/Body Dichotomy - "the 'I' must exist to deny itself" with no further evidence needed to support the argument). Thus the only arguement Kant may successfully achieve is one of possiblity, "God possibly does not exist."

In response to Kant's refutation, Dr. Alvin Plantinga contends that the Ontolotical Arguement has never been sucessfully refuted because the possibility argument is a way of saying nothing on the topic. If this is true, then why is it that most people shy away from debating it? It's because the greatest threat is itself. The Ontological Argument holds an extremely abstract paradigm. If you are not dealing with a well-informed individual, you will be pointlessly assaulted with the Flying Spaghetti Monster and the Pink Unicorn; Stupid and irrelevant at best, but nonetheless, your opponent will still miss the entire point: That God exists.... So that's why I enjoy it. If you understand it, use it. You'll have fun.

Zen in the Art of Writing - Ray Bradbury's Rules to Writing

"Always Know Your Writing Mechanics.... Always.... No excuses.... No reasons.... Always, Always, Always, Know Your Writing Mechanics" - Ray Bradbury

Most authors know how to tell a soon-to-be-writer what he wants: smooth mechanics, solid vocabulary, clutter control, and clear thoughts. There are many books out there that describe, in simplicity, the stratagems of good writing and the wisdom discovered in error. But there is a scarcity of authors who explain the playground problems that every soon-to-be-writer needs constant reminders of – encouragement.

Though Ray Bradbury takes a small step to explain the foundations of writing, in his book Zen in the Art of Writing, he dedicates the rest in speaking to the reader on what writers need to over come; why criticism should be sought and not avoided, why dreams are always controversial, and, in his offensive rhetoric, why to keep on pushing. Time and again Bradbury determinedly goes out of his way to offend the largest groups of people only to demonstrate that writing is not about everyone else, but continuing to write despite everyone else. This is a book to help a soon-to-be-writer learn that good writers express what they believe.

For those who haven't had a chance to read his book, go and read Zen in the Art of Writing. For the less fortunate, below is a compilation of my study notes:

A. Write with Gusto and Zest

People often lack Gusto and Zest when they write. They write more automatically than a machine, and people realize it. Write words that describe what you are saying and don't be afraid to put zest and gusto into your word choice.

B. Write a lot, a lot, and a lot

You only get better by writing more often. Sit down and get comfy, because you need to write a lot, not only to gain confidence, but understand why writing is hard. Try writing a story per week at least 1000 words. From M-F write Rough Drafts 1-5. Then, on Saturday, hurl you r mess into a final copy for a friend to read.

C. Inspiration, The Muse, Poetry, Novels, Wants, Dislikes, Learn

Learn to gain inspiration from all sorts of literature and life experiences. Constantly read Novels for story and writing styles, poetry for cadences, similes and beauteous expressions. Read what you enjoy, so that you can improve, and read what you do not enjoy, so that you can expand your tastes and knowledge.

D. Write without Embarrassment

Don't write with embarrassment because then you admit to writing what others enjoy. It isn't their story, it isn't their life. If you want to write about pink elephants jumping over pancakes then do it. If you want to write about unicorns killing dandelions or birds killing people then do it. But whatever you do, don't write about what other people want to hear. Remember, if they want to hear themselves, they can write their own books.

E. Passion

Any story without passion is devoid of a honest reader. You may write a sci-fi book, but if you do not have passion about sci-fi, then don't write about it. If a story isn't inspired by a writer, by a person, then why would a person want to read it?

F. Not True does not mean Not Real

As Ray Bradbury stated, “The difference between science fiction and science fact is that one is a problem and the other a solution.” Writing about a problem doesn't mean it isn't true. Writing about a problem provides a way for a solution.

G. Search the Past for Today and write completely for tomorrow.

Inspiration is as plentiful as our past. Search your past and you will find the scarce moments you didn't believe existed. Memories that kept you walking at night and kept you sleeping during the day. Also, write completely. If you want to write about love, then give the audience something to love. If you write something sorrowful, then give the audience a reason to cry. If you write a mystery, then give the audience something to wonder for. If you write a book give someone a reason to read it. If you can't give a reason, then you don't have a reason to write it. Books are your dreams written down, and dreams have something to say.

H. Be a good Self-Editor, but don't drain your Character

Friends may give good ideas, but they aren't good editors - They don't know what you are trying to say. Read over your paper and edit it four or five times through by condensing your thoughts. Remove all unnecessary words, keep one or two thoughts per sentence, and one subject per paragraph. The process will help pull all the annoying cotton balls out of your paper and will straighten your tangled mess. Keep condensing until you have done the impossible, then have your friends give their good ideas on how to improve and expand your work. Start by making your point clear, start by editing well.

Delusional

“The mark of an educated mind is to be able to entertain a belief without accepting it” - Aristotle

My earliest memories were always about pitting my thoughts against someone else. It doesn't matter who it was, I was like Sam-I-Am: I was persistent and loved doing it. I could speak to a Mormon out in the cold or an Atheist in the warmth of my house. My audacity even ran afoul with my parents too. But I kept at it because I enjoyed ever bit of it. I enjoyed the chess-like imagination of two ideas engaging and re-engaging. A fight to mental death or immaterial mercy. It was a realm like that of the Roman Colosseum, with two warriors and the silent clashing of thoughts, of shields and swords. When I wasn't debating, I was preparing. And as I went on, I felt the need to peer over that forbidden curtain and see what my opponents were doing. What consumed all his time? Where did his training come about? Since the publication of The God Delusion, I wanted to read its contents and see for myself what books my opponents were reading, what training manuals filled their libraries and, if I were wrong, what books I would follow myself.

Two days ago, after coming home from work, I sat down, read the preface, and thumbed through the contents: A Deeply Religious Non-Believer; The God Hypothesis; Arguments for Gods Existence – this caught my attention; Why there almost certainly is no God; The Roots of Religion; What's wrong with Religion? Why be so Hostile?; Childhood, Abuse, and the escape from Religion. So far? My first impression hopefully will not be my last. I expect to see a book of words without thoughts. Chapters filled with rhetoric used to call out the atheists from the shadows of society and proclaim the superficial doubt of religious intellectualism. As Dr. Plantinga has previous stated, I would thus far agree, “I am not afraid of the New Atheists. The only thing I can say is that the older Atheists had better arguments.” But my purpose isn't to weigh value, it is to find answers.

As I read through The God Delusion, I will be discoursing on each chapter. My contending points, fallacious quotations, or any imperative information will be complied after finishing each chapter. The final compilation should resemble something of a personal nature – a war of ideas.

So, what do I expect out of this book? I expect to find answers: I expect to see the God argument from the other side; To read, research, counter, or believe whatever may be found. If this book fulfills my first impression, then let the goal of this book be to become a compilation of resources to counter those who find the necessity of reverberating Dr. Dawkin's claims. Until then, we must wait and hope.

"180" Movie - A Living Waters Ministry Production

"Where was the World? Where was everyone?"

There will be a time when a book's appalling words and chilling facts describe a world too ready to be embraced. A time when individuals will stand alone calling out, "Where is the world? Where is everyone?" As a lonely star in a cold winter's night their voices will find no warmth. The silence will bring no comfort. Until the world has changed and time begin again, they will only find despair. But those times are not our times and those words are not our words.

Today is the time where men and women are fighting against the appalling words and chilling facts too ready to be embraced. Every day they are standing against the American Holocaust and fighting against the deaths of over 53 million of America's children. Will you let them stand alone? Will you let your hopes become regrets? Will you be left calling out, "Where was I?"

If you have a moment please take the time to watch this video.