Formally logicalizing Kant's critique of proof of the existence of God
Physico-theological argument critique i) ∀x(Px → ∃y Sy) Px means ‘x is a complex and ordered natural phenomenon’, and Sy means ‘y is the designer (God) of this phenomenon.’ However, Kant criticizes as follows: ii) ∀x(Px → ∃y(Sy)) = “For every x, if x is a complex and ordered natural phenomenon, then y exists and y is the designer (God) of that phenomenon.” According to this critique, Complex and ordered nature does not necessarily require God’s design. so that, that argument is based on unproven assumptions. The complexity and order of nature does not necessarily require a designer. Cosmological argument critique i) ∀x(Ex → ∃y Ey) Ex means ‘x exists’, and Ey means ‘y is the cause of x’. ii) ∀x(Ex → ∃y(Ey ∧ Cyx)) = “For every x, if x exists, then y exists and y is the cause of x” Cyx is a logical connector. In i), the causal relationship is not clear, but in ii), specific information has been added. and then, that argument is based on unproven assumptions, which do not justify t...