The Wontontological Argument:
- 1) It is possible for a supremely delicious* wonton to exist.
2) If it is possible for a supremely delicious wonton to exist, then a supremely delicious wonton exists in some possible world.
3) If a supremely delicious wonton exists in some possible world, then it exists in every possible world (due to it being ‘supremely delicious’, which by definition requires it to be maximally tasty in every possible world).
4) If a supremely delicious wonton exists in every possible world, then it exists in the actual world.
5) If a supremely delicious wonton exists in the actual world, then a supremely delicious wonton exists.
6) Therefore, a supremely delicious wonton exists in our world.
7) RAmen
NOTE: An important thing to keep in mind is that there is no possible world in which a bad wonton can exist. Once you properly understand the concept of Supreme Deliciousness, you’ll see that a supremely delicious wonton can’t not exist (i.e. it’s impossible for a supremely delicious wonton to not exist).
In addition to the above, the Wontontological Argument is truly an analogous parallel to the Ontological Argument* * * since it presents the maximally great state of an entity (wontons). Intrinsic great-making properties such as omniscience, omnipotence, omnibenevolence, etc, which come into play in the Ontological Argument, do not apply to the Wontontological Argument for obvious reasons; the only great-making property that applies to a supremely delicious wonton is omnitastiness [1]. Also, a quasi-delicious wonton cannot exist in any possible world in which a supremely delicious wonton exists (which is all of them), since the existence of a supremely delicious wonton undermines the possibility of a quasi-delicious wonton [2].
All credit for the structure of this logic comes courtesy of Anselm of Canterbury and Alvin Plantinga [3]. ‘NOTE’ reasoning above comes courtesy of William Lane Craig [4]. ‘DISCLAIMER’ credo below borrowed from religion in general.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* ‘Supremely Delicious’ is defined as having maximal tastiness* * in every possible world. If a wonton was delicious in one possible world then it would only be kind of tasty; if a wonton was delicious in five possible worlds then it would be tastier; etc. A wonton must be maximally tasty in all possible worlds in order for it to be supremely delicious, and a supremely delicious wonton cannot exist in anything less than all possible worlds or else it would not be supremely delicious.
* * ‘Maximal Tastiness’ implies the necessary existence of a supremely delicious wonton.
* * * The Wontontological Argument is intended to be one big steaming pile; that’s why it parallels the Ontological Argument so well.
[1] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PdO7agEqAZI
[2] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=umpf5ugpkLU
[3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ontological_argument
[4] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D1-ySbzmrEI
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: A supremely delicious wonton is, by its very nature, beyond our comprehension. Any apparent logical flaws in the Wontontological Argument are not actual logical flaws, they are only problems stemming from your own personal misunderstanding.