Mull briefly on this claim: Any argument which stems ultimately from induction, because it is based on generalizing from a limited observation rather than from the whole set of data, cannot be verified to be true. Is it self-referencing, self-refuting, defensible, or something else?
If you are viewing this from facebook, please visit the original article, for better formatting. Ontological arguments are fun, aren’t they? I’ve had this one on the back burner for a while now1, and I had hoped to make some improvements before discussing it with anybody. However, last night after finishing up an article on […]