Big momentum boost for the lions <| sep |> As someone who ' s already spent way too much money on his real family this year , <| sep |> I live in Ireland where criminals can get guns but the Garda police still don ' t have them . The criminals know if they start bringing guns around then the army would be drafted in or worse the Garda would have them so it ' s kind of an unspoken agreement . Sure there is the odd bit of gun crime but it ' s always one criminal killing another , who cares . <| sep |> You even get vegetable ears to go with the state . Good shit . <| sep |> I ' m just looking for a clear formulation of the argument itself . People use several definitions of inimitability during these discussions , which is exactly why I ' d like to see a philosopher try to pin down exactly what the argument is saying . Just like when somebody ' s discussing e . g . the teleological argument or the argument from morality . It ' s not enough for them to say , Well , look at moralitythe world around you . My worldview is therefore correct . First , you ' ve got to tease out what the argument ' s premises really are , and what the argument is assuming . For example , the inimitability argument might be saying that the Quran is inimitably beautiful . Okay , it ' s an aesthetic argument . Are aesthetic values assumed here to be objective or subjective for this argument to work ? How do we go from inimitably beautiful to divine origin ? Is it a miracle claim perhaps going for an inference to the best explanation for the Quran ' s existence , or some sort of Bayesian probability argument ? So if anyone knows of any philosophers who even discussed this argument enough to make it clear what standards it ' s using , that would be great .