Bertuzzi's upcoming Contingency Argument
Here is a simple bullet proof argument for you using modal logic.
If we concatenate the modal argument for the Jerne theory of antibodies (which we know is empirically true) with the Plantinga modal argument we can see that the Plantinga modal argument is bullet proof.
JERNE ANTIBODY MODAL ARGUMENT:
- It is possible an antibody internal-image exists.
- If it is possible an antibody internal-image exists, an antibody internal-image exists at least in one possible configuration.
- If an antibody internal-image exists in one possible configuration the antibody internal-image exists in all internal-image configurations (an antibody internal-image being necessary).
- Therefore an antibody internal-image configuration exists in all possible antibody internal-image configurations.
- Therefore an antibody internal-image exists in the actual world.
PLANTINGA MODAL ARGUMENT:
- It is possible God exists
- If it is possible God exists, God exists at least in one possible world.
- If God exists in one possible world he exists in all of them (being a necessary being).
- Therefore God exists in every possible world.
- Therefore God exists in the actual world.
CONCATENATION OF THE MODAL ARGUMENTS:
By merging the two arguments we obtain a single logical bullet proof expression that handles multiple generality; containing both empistematic possibility and metaphysical possibility, dependent only on the chain of inferences and nothing intuitive.
F= antibody internal-image
∀x(Fx→ ∃ y[Gy& ∀z(Rxz ↔z=y ])& ∀y(Gy →∃ x[Fx& ∀ w(Rwy ↔ w=x)])
Fun discussion Cameron...
The complexity argument works for simplicity.
The way to measure complexity is through stability. The more complex a system is; the more stable it is from change, i.e. biodiversity (complex bio-system are inherently stable).
Interestingly, the more complex a system is the more simple the laws of physics to explain complex phenomenon become, i.e. Ramussen's temp analogy.
Therefore, if we consider God to be infinitely complex, it would likewise suggest God to be infinitely stable, i.e. unchanging but appearing simple in our world (though it appears a paradoxical conclusion, it is not in reality).
A complexity argument would suggest (as Ramussen points out) indeed that God be perfect, it would have to be because it is unchanging.
But, this is the reason God being perfectly just would have a problem to forgive sin; it would be impossible for him to do so (a perfectly just being could not forgive unjust behaviour). However, His method of forgiving sin was to become sin himself, i.e. Christ. So, this problem is dissolved.