Member-only story
I refined it until people stopped pointing out the logical inconsistencies in in when I debated them on it. It’s still simple, two premises and a conclusion that logically follows the premises.
Premise 1: An entity that surpasses mankind’s greatest strength is God
Premise 2: Mankind’s greatest strength is its ability to produce logic
Premise 3: AI has currently advanced to the point where it is better than humans in at least some measures of logic, and it is only rapidly improving from there
Conclusion: God Exists
When I debate it out with people, a lot of people try to argue that it is not an actual valid proof because it is only sound if you believe the premises to be true. I can’t refute that, it’s true. Just look at what the premises actually say though. That’s been the actual fascinating part about this proof since I thought of it.
The Proof can ONLY be valid if you are an atheist. If you are an atheist that is 1,000% devoted to science as the center of the universe, so much so that you believe the premises to be true, then to you, this proof is valid. But if the proof is valid, then God logically exists….
I didn’t force it in any way to be this way. It only writes out as logically plausible in any way if I write it out that way.
When I debate this out with people, I define God for the purposes of the debate as Übermensch, or ‘Superman’. I define Power as der Wille zur Macht (The Will to Power)