From: posting-system@google.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 11:37 AM
To: brian@holtz.org
Subject: Re: The psychology of Atheism

From: brian@holtz.org (Brian Holtz)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism.moderated
Subject: Re: The psychology of Atheism
References: <2002021615452268725@zetnet.co.uk> <a4qv5k$vl5$2@news5.svr.pol.co.uk> <008e01c1bc90$c667f9e0$0200a8c0@smateo1.sfba.home.com> <a5jigg$8m$5@newsg2.svr.pol.co.uk>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.236.204.165
Message-ID: <29c16047.0203191137.7cf98bd2@posting.google.com>

Jim Humphries <jim@nospamma.humph65.fsworld.co.uk> wrote 

> The creator-deity is partially  and traditionally
> defined as maximally perfect entity ( defined as a reality so
> great that no actual or possible world contains anything
> surpassing it)-so there could be no 'SuperGod'.
> 
> We could in any case shave away any additional 'SuperGods'
> with Ockham's razor. It won't do BTW to say that Ockham's
> razor is applicable to the positing of a God ( instead of
> accepting naturalism) , since - for one thing- ceteris
> paribus conditions do not obtain.

This argument is rebutted in my Mar 12 posting in this thread.