Which of the 14 points did you not agree with? As for his ontological proof, I think that was more something he did for fun, to see if he could impart some rigor to Anselm's argument.
Jason On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 5:13 PM, Pierz <[email protected]> wrote: > It's amazing to me that a man of Gödel's brilliance could take the drivel > of the ontological argument seriously. Did I miss something about that > specious piece of sophistry? Other than that I'm in 87.5% agreement with > him... > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
