Does the Ontological Argument Beg the Question?
نویسنده
چکیده
1. God exists in the understanding. 2. God might have existed in reality (God is a possible being). 3. If something exists only in the understanding and might have existed in reality, then it might have been greater than it is. 4. Suppose God exists only in the understanding. 5. God might have been greater than he is. 6. God is a being than which a greater is possible. 7. The being than which none greater is possible is a being than which a greater is possible. 8. It is false that God exists only in the understanding. 9. God exists in reality as well as in the understanding.
منابع مشابه
A Mechanically Assisted Examination of Begging the Question in Anselm’s Ontological Argument
I use mechanized verification to examine several firstand higher-order formalizations of Anselm’s Ontological Argument against the charge of begging the question. I propose three different criteria for a premise to beg the question in fully formal proofs and find that one or another applies to all the formalizations examined. My purpose is to demonstrate that mechanized verification provides an...
متن کاملCoincident Entities and Question-Begging Predicates: an Issue in Meta-Ontology
Meta-ontology (in van Inwagen's sense) concerns the methodology of ontology, and a controversial meta-ontological issue is to what extent ontology can rely on linguistic analysis while establishing the furniture of the world. This paper discusses an argument advanced by some ontologists (I call them unifiers) against supporters of or coincident entities (I call them multipliers) and its meta-on...
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 کامل21 7 + ( , 03266
In this paper I present a novel objection to ontological arguments. The argument concerns ontological arguments in general and has the general form of a reductio ad absurdum. Roughly, it rests on the fact that if a sound ontological argument were available, it would contradict the very nature of God. For God aims at maximising the development of human good qualities (including thus faith) and i...
متن کاملOn Our Experience of Ceasing to Exist
In a recent article, J. D. Kiernan-Lewis has claimed that "it is evident that Nathan Oaldander has failed to understand both the analogy and the ontological point of the argument against tenselessness." The argument, which he believes is implicit in Prior's classic paper "Thank Goodness That's Over," is analogous to the arguments by Thomas Nagel and Frank Jackson against physicalism. Thus, Kier...
متن کامل