I recently put up the following argument by Ramon Lull, framed in the mechanism of his Art:
[ A A | being perfection | nonbeing imperfection | S V | Y Z ]
The Lullian Art is sometimes called a 'formal logic', but this is not strictly true. A formal logic, in our sense, is usually a literal calculus, i.e., a set of operations on variables identified by letters. Lull's work is not like this at all. It would be closer to think of it as akin to musical notation. [ S V | Y Z ] serves as a sort of key signature for the argument, and the goal of the Art is to optimize the harmony of concepts. So we are trying to find the greatest possible consonance among our fundamental dignitates, or key principles (which in the Lullian Art are things like Goodness and Greatness). S represents the soul, the person who is actually engaging in the argument, remembering (being mindful of, keeping in mind), understanding, and willing; V indicates virtue or vice in these activities. Y and Z represent truth and falsity, respectively. [ A A ] indicates the question whose answer we are trying to find; in this case, Does God exist?
The way the argument proceeds, put very briefly, is by comparison and contrast of being and nonbeing on the one hand with perfection and imperfection on the other, to see which is the true consonance and which is the false. It is, in other words, the Lullian version of an ontological argument.
