Aside from underlining the place where Gödel injected his clearly non-axiomatic and non-empirical assertion, I post this non-trivial counter theorem based on Gödel’s proof of the existence of God without further comment except: Remember, ethics are based on attempting to generalizing your maxims, and as it happens, some Lemons are sweet. But you get the idea. PS: This says more about logic and Gödel than it does about God
Axiom 1. A property is sweet if and only if its negation is sour.
Axiom 2. A property is sweet if necessarily it contains of an sweet property.
Theorem 1. A sweet property is logically consistent (i.e., possible it has some instance.)
Definition. Something is Lemon-like if and only if it possesses all sweet properties.
Axiom 3. Being Lemon-like is a sweet property.
Axiom 4. Being a sweet property is (logical, hence) necessary.
Definition. A property P is the essence of x if and only if x has P and P is necessarily minimal.
Theorem 2. If x is Lemon-like, then being Lemon-like is the essence of x.
Definition NE(x): x necessarily exists if it has an essential property.
Axiom 5. Being NE is Lemon-like
Theorem 3. Necessarily, there is some x such that x is Lemon-like.
Allison Park, PA 15101