—“Curt what are your thoughts on Gödel’s ontological proof?”—ArguingFanatic @ArguingFanatic
(a) It’s not Godel’s it’s just his most recent restatement.
(b) A proof is a test of internal consistency of its axioms not external correspondence or operational possibility.
(c) Proofs test axioms and words. Theories test premises and actions.
(d) Actions are informationally more complete than words.
(e) Logic falsifies not justifies
(f) And we must falsify BOTH words (consistency) and actions (operational possibility and resulting correspondence)
(g) There are no such things as ‘ontological proofs’ in and of themselves that are other than meaningless tautologies.
It’s all just sophistry inherited from scripturalism. (Scriptural ‘interpretation’)
Philosophy is dead for truth.
Its limit is choice.