There's these "ontological arguments", which are basically folks trying to prove the existence of a god by reasoning with pure logic, so without relying on evidence. And they all sound like that. ๐ซ
One of the classics goes roughly like this:
- There is good and bad. (Which is one hell of an axiom.)
- A creature can exist which unifies all good properties. (Yet another hell of an axiom.)
- Because this creature has all these good properties, it would be even gooder, if it did exist.
- Since this creature unifies all good properties and its existence is itself a good property, it therefore must exist.
These arguments are also always funny, because the same logic can be used to "prove" all kinds of things. For example, a perfect island can exist, therefore it must exist. ๐
As far as I can tell, the arguments don't actually get better over time either, but rather just more convoluted, to make it less obvious how silly they are...