Argument A: The Ontological Argument for the Existence of God
(1) God is a being greater than which none can be conceived (or the Greatest Conceivable Being).
(2) The Greatest Conceivable Being does exist in the mind.
(3) If the Greatest Conceivable Being were to exist in only the mind, we could conceive of a greater being: a Being that exists in reality as well.
(4) Therefore, to be the Greatest Conceivable Being it must exist not only in the mind, but also in reality.
(5) Therefore, the Greatest Conceivable Being exists in reality.
(6) Therefore, God exists in reality (from 1 and 5)
Argument U: The Ontological Argument for the Existence of Unicorns
(1u) A unicorn is a creature, of which nothing more unicornlike can be conceived (which is to say that a unicorn is perfectly a unicorn).
(2u) The perfect unicorn does exist in the mind.
(3u) If the perfect unicorn were to exist only in the mind, we could conceive of a more perfect unicorn: a unicorn that exists in reality as well.
(4u) Therefore, to be the perfect unicorn it must exist not just in the mind but also in reality.
(5u) Therefore, the perfect unicorn exists in reality.
(6u) Therefore a unicorn exists in reality.
What is wrong with Argument U that is not wrong with Argument A? (I really do want answers to this; be cynical, be snide, be witty; share this with friends, share it with enemies, reblog it; ask a philosopher, ask a priest)