avicenna’s ontological argument as viewed by averroes
نویسندگان
چکیده
averroes does not accept avicenna’s argument for the existence of the necessary bing. some maintain that averroes disagreed with avicenna, since he could not understand the relationship between essence and existence and could not make sense of the essential possibility and that he did not distinguish between potential possibility and essential possibility. in this paper, we argue that averroes knew essential possibility as well as the relationship between essence and existence, but philosophy in that age failed to present and resolve the problem of the fundamental reality of existence and the problem of making existence .so, essential possibility could not be a basis for this argument. to judge between avicenna and averroes, we must not concentrate on matters that were resolved then, because these foundations had not been examined and the argument was based on these foundations.
منابع مشابه
Knowledge as Viewed by Muslim
There are three views among Muslim thinkers concerning the nature of knowledge. Fakhr al-Din Razi holds that knowledge is self- evident and notdefinable, while Juwaini and his pupil Ghazzali hold that the concept of knowledge is theoretical and its definition is also too hard. There is another approach by the majority of Muslim theologians and philosophers who maintain that the concept of kn...
متن کاملThe Ontological Presuppositions of the Ontological Argument*
JLhe most recent stage in the analysis of St. Anselm's Ontologi cal Argument is the modal-logical stage : if one wants to get clear as to what is wrong (or right) with it, one should phrase it in S5.1 I have misgivings about this maneuver, if it is claimed in the name of historical exegesis. While I think that the connnections between the Ontological Argument and modal logic are insightful and ...
متن کاملThe Modal Ontological Argument
We know more today about the second, or so-called 'modal', version of St. Anselm's ontological argument than we did when Charles Hartshorne and Norman Malcolm brought it to the attention of philosophers some years ago. But there is still much to be learned. Criticisms of the modal ontological argument focus on its premises, namely (i) the claim that perfection, or maximal greatness, implies nec...
متن کاملThe Ontological Argument in PVS ∗
The Ontological Argument, an 11th Century proof of the existence of God, is a good candidate for Fun With Formal Methods as nearly everyone finds the topic interesting. We formalize the Argument in PVS and verify its correctness. The formalization raises delicate questions in formal logic and provides an opportunity to show how these are handled, soundly and efficiently, by the predicatively-su...
متن کاملon zalta on anselm’s ontological argument
oppenheimer and zalta, in a co-authored paper, argue that the anselm’s ontological argument can be formalized based on free logic and the concept of conceivability. according to their version, there are only two premises in anselm’s argument. we will argue that one can extend their formalization by introducing an argument for one of the two premises based on anselm’s text. we will also show tha...
متن کاملمنابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
عنوان ژورنال:
فلسفه دینجلد ۶، شماره ۴، صفحات ۱۱۳-۱۳۷
کلمات کلیدی
میزبانی شده توسط پلتفرم ابری doprax.com
copyright © 2015-2023