Explain xkcd: It's 'cause you're dumb.
Welcome to the explain xkcd wiki!
Today, the wiki is in read-only mode to allow for a hosting migration. Please enjoy reading all our xkcd explanations.
We have an explanation for all 1506 xkcd comics,
and only 0
(0%) are incomplete. Help us finish them!
Go to this comic explanation
Title text: A God who holds the world record for eating the most skateboards is greater than a God who does not hold that record.
|| This explanation may be incomplete or incorrect: First draft. Could use some attention from someone better-versed in theology and/or philosophy.|
Ontology is the study of existence. Ontological arguments for the existence of God are those that argue that the nature of existence requires there to be a God. The general formulation of an ontological argument is that there must be some entity that is greater than all other entities, and that that being is, by definition, God.
The ontological argument has never been formally disproven, and Bertrand Russell noted that "it is easier to feel convinced that it must be fallacious than it is to find out precisely where the fallacy lies." This comic proposes a potential fallacy—suppose that the ontological argument proved that there was a greatest entity, and that entity was God. If this God could disprove the validity ontological argument, then there is no longer a valid proof that this entity is God. Therefore, this God that is proved by the ontological argument must not be able to disprove the ontological argument. This comic jokingly suggests that if there was an entity that could disprove the ontological argument, then the entity is "greater" since this entity can do something that the other entity cannot. However, the ontological argument cannot be a valid proof that this entity is God, since this entity can disprove it. If this suggestion was taken at face value, then the result is that the ontological argument cannot prove God. Along with the title text, this comic pokes fun at the ambiguous notion of "greatness" used in the ontological argument.
The paradox is somewhat similar to the question of "What happens when an unstoppable force meets an immovable object?" It is also similar in character to the kinds of contradictions exploited in Gödel's incompleteness theorems and the Halting problem.
- [Megan and Cueball are walking side-by-side]
- Megan: ... But wouldn't a God who could find a flaw in the ontological argument be even greater?
Is this out of date? .
Lots of people
contribute to make this wiki a success. Many of the recent contributors, listed above, have just joined. You can do it too! Create your account here
You can read a brief introduction about this wiki at explain xkcd. Feel free to sign up for an account and contribute to the wiki! We need explanations for comics, characters, themes, memes and everything in between. If it is referenced in an xkcd web comic, it should be here.
- List of all comics contains a table of most recent xkcd comics and links to the rest, and the corresponding explanations. There are incomplete explanations listed here. Feel free to help out by expanding them!
- If you see that a new comic hasn't been explained yet, you can create it: Here's how.
- We sell advertising space to pay for our server costs. To learn more, go here.
Don't be a jerk. There are a lot of comics that don't have set in stone explanations; feel free to put multiple interpretations in the wiki page for each comic.
If you want to talk about a specific comic, use its discussion page.
Please only submit material directly related to —and helping everyone better understand— xkcd... and of course only submit material that can legally be posted (and freely edited). Off-topic or other inappropriate content is subject to removal or modification at admin discretion, and users who repeatedly post such content will be blocked.
If you need assistance from an admin, post a message to the Admin requests board.