Revisiting the Transcendental Argument for the Existence of God: Is It Self-Refuting?

The so-called self-refutation of the transcendental argument for the existence of God is a misapprehension that needs to be addressed. Just as stating that the number Pi is not amenable to being a root of any integer polynomial does not make the argument self-refuting, similarly, the transcendental argument for the existence of God cannot be considered self-refuting merely because it deals with abstract concepts.

Transcendental Numbers and Their Nature

To better understand the argument, let's begin by revisiting the concept of a transcendental number. A transcendental number is a complex number that is not a root of any integer polynomial, meaning it is not an algebraic number of any degree. Every real transcendental number, such as Pi, is also irrational. The irrationality and transcendental nature of Pi do not render the argument self-refuting; instead, they reveal the inherent limitations of rational definitions and measurements.

The assertion that the ratio of a circle’s circumference to its diameter is Pi and that squaring the circle is impossible does not refute the existence of Pi as a transcendental number. Similarly, the transcendental argument for the existence of God deals with concepts that transcend the physical and rational realms. Just as logical consistency is not amenable to logical analysis without infinite regress, transcendental concepts require a different approach to understanding and defining their nature.

Transcendental Arguments and Their Validity

The transcendental argument for the existence of God is often summarized as follows:

Premise 1: If morality is objective and absolute, then God must exist. Premise 2: Morality is objective and absolute. Conclusion: Therefore, God must exist.

While this argument is logically valid, it is unsound due to its premises. The first premise assumes without proof that any objective and absolute morality must have a divine source, which is a premise requiring more substantial evidence. The second premise lacks a clear definition and proof of its claim.

The argument, therefore, is not self-refuting; it simply lacks empirical and definitional proof. The illegitimacy of the premises does not invalidate the form of the argument, but it does mean that the conclusion remains unfounded. Many philosophical arguments are valid but unsound due to their premises; this is no exception.

The Nature of Logical and Transcendental Concepts

To fully grasp the nature of transcendental concepts and arguments, we must consider the inherent limitations of logic and language. The concept of logical consistency, for instance, cannot be fully explained within a finite logical system due to its recursive nature. Similarly, attempting to define 'definition' or 'existence' in a finite language leads to infinite regress, which is not a contradiction but a limitation of language and logic.

Transcendental arguments for the existence of God, such as the moral argument, fall into a similar category. The nature of God, the universe, and morality is inherently abstract and often beyond the physical and rational. While the argument might seem sophomoric or lacking in rigorous proof, it reflects the limits of our current understanding and the inherent complexity of such existential questions.

Finding Meaning and Truth in Transcendental Discussions

Understanding the role and limitations of transcendental arguments for the existence of God can lead to a deeper appreciation of philosophical and religious discussions. These arguments often serve as thought-provoking starting points for broader existential questions, prompting individuals to explore the nature of reality, morality, and existence.

By addressing the limitations of logical and empirical methods, we can better appreciate the value of transcendental discussions. These arguments challenge us to consider the boundaries of our understanding and the nature of abstract concepts that surpass physical and rational limitations.

In conclusion, the transcendental argument for the existence of God is not self-refuting but rather a thought-provoking exploration of abstract concepts that reflect the complexity of existence. While the premises of these arguments may be unsound, they remain significant for stimulating philosophical inquiry and thought.