Rasmussen's Gödelian OA

Seeing that there is no entailment versus not seeing that there is an entailment.

This is the distinction that drives Joshua Rasmussen’s recent Gödelian flavored Ontological Argument.  If we possess the concept of perfection, and can just *see* that no negative properties are implied by positive properties, then it seems that this argument can be run successfully.  But, if we’re instead just merely failing to see that positive properties do entail negative ones, the argument fails.

I’m still worried about value nihilism as a potent objection to this type of OA, though.

Here is the best presentation of the argument: https://joshualrasmussen.com/ontological/