SUMMARY
Hartshorne's (1962) proof of the existence of God is structured around modal logic, specifically theorems of S5, concluding that while the argument is valid, it is not sound. The proof asserts that if God exists, then it is necessarily true that God exists, but it does not establish God's existence as a definitive conclusion. The discussion highlights the burden of proof on theists to demonstrate God's existence and critiques the argument's reliance on modal logic without empirical evidence. Participants express skepticism about the relevance of such philosophical debates, comparing them to discussions about mythical creatures.
PREREQUISITES
- Understanding of modal logic, particularly S5 theorems
- Familiarity with logical implications and equivalences
- Knowledge of philosophical arguments regarding the existence of God
- Basic grasp of the burden of proof in philosophical discourse
NEXT STEPS
- Study modal logic and its applications in philosophical arguments
- Explore the implications of the burden of proof in debates about existence
- Investigate alternative arguments for and against the existence of God
- Analyze critiques of Hartshorne's proof and similar philosophical arguments
USEFUL FOR
Philosophers, theologians, students of logic, and anyone interested in the intersection of philosophy and theology regarding the existence of God.