Related categories
Siblings:
59 found
Search inside:
(import / add options)   Order:
1 — 50 / 59
  1. Carlos Arboleda Mora (2014). Richard Kearney y la cuarta reducción fenomenológica. Escritos 22 (49):313-335.
    Uno de los fenomenólogos de la nueva generación que sigue la línea de Husserl, Heidegger, Marion y Lévinas es Richard Kearney. Este filósofo irlandés, católico, propone una cuarta reducción fenomenológica, esto es, volver al eschaton enraizado en la existencia cotidiana: encontrar la voz y el rostro de lo más alto en lo más bajo. Es como la realización de aquella idea heideggeriana de que “Sólo aquello del mundo que es de poca monta llegará alguna vez a ser cosa.” (...)
    Remove from this list  
    Translate
      Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  2. Elizabeth D. Burns (2013). 'Ontological' Arguments From Experience: Daniel A. Dombrowski, Iris Murdoch, and the Nature of Divine Reality. Religious Studies 49 (4):459-480.
    Dombrowski and Murdoch offer versions of the ontological argument which aim to avoid two types of objection – those concerned with the nature of the divine, and those concerned with the move from an abstract concept to a mind-independent reality. For both, the nature of the concept of God/Good entails its instantiation, and both supply a supporting argument from experience. It is only Murdoch who successfully negotiates the transition from an abstract concept to the instantiation of that concept, however, and (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  3. Hugh Chandler, Augustine's Argument for the Existence of God.
    Roughly speaking, Augustine claims that ‘Immutable Truth’ is superior to the human mind and, consequently a legitimate candidate for the role of God. Clearly there is such a thing as Immutable Truth. So either that is God, or there is something superior to Immutable Truth, and that superior thing is God. I spell out this argument, and offer some objections to it.
    Remove from this list  
    Translate
      Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  4. Hugh Chandler, The Monologion Argument for the Existence and Supremacy of God.
    In the first two chapters of the Monologion Anselm shows, or tries to show that “Of all the things that exist, there is one that is the best, greatest and supreme.” In this paper I examine his argument.
    Remove from this list  
    Translate
      Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  5. Michael E. Cuffaro (2012). Kant and Frege on Existence and the Ontological Argument. History of Philosophy Quarterly 29 (4):337-354.
    I argue that Kant's and Frege's refutations of the ontological argument are more similar than has generally been acknowledged. As I clarify, for both Kant and Frege, to say that something exists is to assert of a concept that it is instantiated. With such an assertion one expresses that there is a particular relation between the instantiating object and a rational subject - a particular mode of presentation for the object in question. By its very nature such a relation cannot (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  6. Domingos Faria (2016). Uma avaliação do argumento ontológico modal de Plantinga. Kairos: Journal of Philosophy and Science 15 (1):71-84.
    My aim in this paper is to critically assess Plantinga’s modal ontological argument for existence of God, such as it is presented in the book “The Nature of Necessity” (1974). Plantinga tries to show that this argument is (i) valid and (ii) it is rational to believe in his main premise, namely “there is a possible world in which maximal greatness is instantiated”. On the one hand, I want to show that this argument is logically valid in both systems B (...)
    Remove from this list  
    Translate
      Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  7. Hector Ferreiro (2012). El argumento ontológico y la muerte de la metafísica. Dos visiones complementarias: Kant y Hegel. Veritas: Revista de Filosofia da PUCRS 57 (3):99-120.
    The core of Kant’s criticism of the ontological argument is the thesis that existence is not a real predicate capable of being added to the concept of an object. The concept of the most perfect or the most real being is a subjective content that is as such completely determined, that is to say, that already has all the determinations that define that concept as such. Therefore, to know if that object also exists in the real world is indispensable that (...)
    Remove from this list  
    Translate
      Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  8. Philippe Gagnon (2012). Raymond Ruyer, la Biologie Et la Théologie Naturelle [Raymond Ruyer, Biology, and Natural Theology]. In Ronny Desmet & Michel Weber (eds.), Chromatikon VIII: Annales de la philosophie en procès — Yearbook of Philosophy in Process. Éditions Chromatika
    This is the outline: Introduction : le praticien d’une science-philosophie; Épiphénoménisme retourné et subjectivité délocalisée; Dieu est-il jamais inféré par la science ?; La question du panthéisme; Le pilotage axiologique et la parabole mécaniste; L'unité domaniale comme ce qui reste en dehors de la science.
    Remove from this list  
    Translate
      Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  9. Kevin J. Harrelson (2013). Ontological Proofs Today. [REVIEW] Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews.
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  10. Ludger Honnefelder, Rega Wood & Mechthild Dreyer (eds.) (1996). John Duns Scotus: Metaphysics and Ethics. E.J. Brill.
  11. Srećko Kovač (2015). Causal Interpretation of Gödel's Ontological Proof. In Kordula Świętorzecka (ed.), Gödel's Ontological Argument: History, Modifications, and Controversies. Semper 163.201.
  12. Srećko Kovač (2003). Some Weakened Gödelian Ontological Systems. Journal of Philosophical Logic 32 (6):565-588.
    We describe a K B Gödelian ontological system, and some other weak systems, in a fully formal way using theory of types and natural deduction, and present a completeness proof in its main and specific parts. We technically and philosophically analyze and comment on the systems (mainly with respect to the relativism of values) and include a sketch of some connected aspects of Gidel's relation to Kant.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  13. Srećko Kovač & Kordula Świętorzecka (2015). Gödel's "Slingshot" Argument and His Onto-Theological System. In Kordula Świętorzecka (ed.), Gödel's Ontological Argument: History, Modifications, and Controversies. Semper 123-162.
  14. Piotr Labenz (2006). Does Frege's Definition of Existence Invalidate the Ontological Argument? Sorites 17:68 - 80.
    It is a well-known remark of Frege’s that his definition of existence invalidated the ontological argument for the existence of God. That has subsequently often been taken for granted. This paper attempts to investigate, whether rightly so. For this purpose, both Frege’s ontological doctrine and the ontological argument are outlined. Arguments in favour and against both are considered, and reduced to five specific questions. It is argued that whether Frege’s remark was right depends on what the answers to these questions (...)
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  15. Martin Lin (2007). Spinoza's Arguments for the Existence of God. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 75 (2):269-297.
    It is often thought that, although Spinoza develops a bold and distinctive conception of God, the arguments that he offers which purport to prove God’s existence contribute nothing new to natural theology. Rather, he is seen as just another participant in the seventeenthcentury revival of the ontological argument initiated by Descartes and taken up by Malebranche and Leibniz among others. That this is the case is both puzzling and unfortunate. It is puzzling because although Spinoza does offer an ontological proof (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (9 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  16. Gareth B. Matthews (2004). The Ontological Argument. In William Mann (ed.), The Blackwell Guide to the Philosophy of Religion. Blackwell Pub.
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  17. Jason Megill (2012). Two Ontological Arguments for the Existence of an Omniscient Being. In Miroslaw Szatkowski (ed.), Ontological Proofs Today. Ontos Verlag 50--77.
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  18. Jason Megill & Amy Reagor (2012). A Modal Theistic Argument. In Miroslaw Szatkowski (ed.), Ontological Proofs Today. Ontos Verlag 50--89.
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  19. T. L. Miethe (1977). The Ontological Argument: A Research Bibliography. Modern Schoolman 54 (2):148-166.
    Within the past two decades or so there has been a gradual renewal of interest in metaphysics in general and in the theistic arguments in particular. "the ontological argument: a research bibliography," is the most comprehensive bibliography ever done on this argument for god's existence, with over 330 items listed. the article is divided into the following categories: general histories of the argument; the argument in anselm; in the middle ages after anselm; from descartes to kant; in continental philosophy; in (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  20. Wesley Morriston (1985). Is God “Significantly Free?”. Faith and Philosophy 2 (3):257-264.
    In an impressive series of books and articles, Alvin Plantinga has developed challenging new versions of two much discussed pieces of philosophical theology: the free will defense and the ontological argument.' His treatment of both subjects has provoked a tremendous amount of critical comment. What has not been generally noticed', however, is that when taken together, Plantinga's views on these two subjects lead to a very serious problem in philosophical theology. The premises of his version of the ontological argument, when (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  21. Michael Nelson, Existence. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
  22. Timothy O'Connor (1995). From First Efficient Cause to God: Scotus on the Identification Stage of the Cosmological Argument. In L. Honnefelder, R. Wood & M. Dreyer (eds.), John Duns Scotus: Metaphysics and Ethics. E.J.Brill
  23. G. Oppy (2011). On Behalf of the Fool. Analysis 71 (2):304-306.
    This paper responds to a previous paper by Gary Matthews and Lynne Rudder Baker. Their paper, in turn, was a response to my reply to an even earlier paper of theirs. (The relevant bibliographical details are in this paper.) They claim to have a new, improved, simple ontological argument. I argue that the new, simple ontological argument is not, in any way, improved.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (10 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  24. G. Oppy (2011). Objection to a Simplified Ontological Argument. Analysis 71 (1):105-106.
    This paper offers a short extension of the dialogue between Anselm and the Fool that is contained in "The Ontological Argument Simplified" by Gary Matthews and Lynne Rudder Baker. My extension of the dialogue ends with the Fool proclaiming that "what looks like an argument of elegant simplicity turns out to be no argument at all".
    Remove from this list   Direct download (12 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  25. G. Oppy (2008). Review: Daniel A. Dombrowski: Rethinking the Ontological Argument: A Neoclassical Theistic Response. [REVIEW] Mind 117 (467):690-693.
    Critical review of Daniel Dombrowski's "Rethinking the Ontological Argument".
    Remove from this list   Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  26. G. Oppy (2000). Response to Gettings. Analysis 60 (4):363-367.
    This article is a reply to Michael Gettings' criticisms of a previous paper of mine on Godel's ontological argument. (All relevant bibliographical details may be found in the article.) I provide a patch to my previous -- faulty -- attempt to provide a parody of Godel's ontological argument on the model of Gaunilo's parody of Anselm's Proslogion 2 argument.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (10 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  27. G. Oppy (1996). Godelian Ontological Arguments. Analysis 56 (4):226-230.
    This paper aims to show that Godel's ontological argument can be parodied in much the same kind of way in which Gaunilo parodied Anselm's Proslogion argument. The parody in this paper fails; there is a patch provided in "Reply to Gettings" (Analysis 60, 4, 2000, 363-7).
    Remove from this list   Direct download (10 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  28. Graham Oppy, Ontological Arguments. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
    Latest version of my SEP entry on ontological arguments, which first appeared in 1996. General discussion of ontological arguments. Includes a brief historical overview, a taxonomy of different kinds of ontological arguments, a brief survey of objections to the different kinds of ontological arguments identified in the taxonomy, and more extended discussions of Anselm's ontological argument (Proslogion 2), Godel's ontological argument, and Plantinga's ontological argument.
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  29. Graham Oppy (2013). Lowe on "The Ontological Argument". In Chad Meister, J. P. Moreland & K. Sweus (eds.), Debating Christian Theism. Oxford University Press 72-84.
    This paper is a discussion of an ontological argument defended by E. J. Lowe in the *Routledge Companion to Philosophy of Religion* (edited by C. Meister and P. Copan, at pp.332-40). The volume to which this paper belongs contains an article by Lowe which defends a different ontological argument from the one that I discuss.
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  30. Graham Oppy (2012). Maydole on Ontological Arguments. In Miroslaw Szatkowski (ed.), Ontological Proofs Today. Ontos Verlag 445.
    This paper is an assessment of Robert Maydole's work on ontological arguments. (Bibliographical details are provided in the text.) I argue that Maydole's ontological arguments are unsuccessful.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  31. Graham Oppy (2012). Response to Maydole. In Miroslaw Szatkowski (ed.), Ontological Proofs Today. Ontos Verlag 50--487.
    This paper is my second contribution to the Szatkowski volume. In the first paper, I provide a critical discussion of Bob Maydole's ontological arguments. In this second paper, I respond to Maydole's critical response to my first paper. My overall verdict is that Maydole does not successfully defend his arguments against my critical attack.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  32. Graham Oppy (2012). Pruss, Motivational Centrality, and Probabilities Attached to Possibility Premises in Modal Ontological Arguments. European Journal for Philosophy of Religion 4 (2):65-85.
    This paper is a critique of a paper by Alex Pruss. I argue that Pruss's attempt to motivate acceptance of the key possiblity premise in modal ontological arguments fails.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  33. Graham Oppy (2011). Perfection, Near-Perfection, Maximality, and Anselmian Theism. International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 69 (2):119-138.
    Anselmian theists claim (a) that there is a being than which none greater can be conceived; and (b) that it is knowable on purely—solely, entirely—a priori grounds that there is a being than which none greater can be conceived. In this paper, I argue that Anselmian Theism gains traction by conflating different interpretations of the key description ‘being than which no greater can be conceived’. In particular, I insist that it is very important to distinguish between ideal excellence and maximal (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  34. Graham Oppy (2009). Pruss's Ontological Arguments. Religious Studies 45 (3):355-363.
    First, I suggest that it is possible to make some further improvements upon the Gödelian ontological arguments that Pruss develops. Then, I argue that it is possible to parody Pruss's Gödelian ontological arguments in a way that shows that they make no contribution towards 'lowering the probability of atheism and raising the probability of theism'. I conclude with some remarks about ways in which the arguments of this paper can be extended to apply to the whole family of Gödelian ontological (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (9 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  35. Graham Oppy (2009). Arguing About Gods. Cambridge University Press.
    In this book, Graham Oppy examines arguments for and against the existence of God. He shows that none of these arguments is powerful enough to change the minds of reasonable participants in debates on the question of the existence of God. His conclusion is supported by detailed analyses of the arguments as well as by the development of a theory about the purpose of arguments and the criteria that should be used in judging whether or not arguments are successful. Oppy (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  36. Graham Oppy (2008). Higher-Order Ontological Arguments. Philosophy Compass 3 (5):1066-1078.
    This paper discusses recent work on higher-order ontological arguments, including work on arguments due to Gödel, Maydole and Pruss. After setting out a range of these arguments, the paper seeks to highlight the principal difficulties that these kinds of arguments confront. One important aim of the paper is to cast light on Gödel's ontological argument by way of an examination of a range of related higher-order arguments.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (9 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  37. Graham Oppy (2008). The Ontological Argument. In Paul Copan & Chad V. Meister (eds.), Philosophy of Religion: Classic and Contemporary Issues. Blackwell Pub.
    General discussion of ontological arguments. (Extended the discussion of ontological arguments in the then current version of my SEP entry on ontological arguments.).
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  38. Graham Oppy (2007). Maydole’s Modal Perfection Argument (Again). Philo 10 (1):72-84.
    In “On Oppy’s Objections to the Modal Perfection Argument,” Philo 8, 2, 2005, 123–30, Robert Maydole argues that his modal perfection argument—set out in his “The Modal Perfection Argument for a Supreme Being,” Philo 6, 2, 2003, 299–313—“remains arguably sound” in the face of the criticisms that I made of this argument in my “Maydole’s 2QS5 Argument,” Philo 7, 2, 2004, 203–11. I reply that Maydole is wrong: his argument is fatally flawed, and his attempts to avoid the criticisms that (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  39. Graham Oppy (2006). Logic and Theism. Philo 9 (1):73-91.
    This paper is a critical review of Howard Sobel’s ’Logic and Theism’. I discuss his analyses of ontological arguments, cosmological arguments, teleological arguments, and arguments from evil, and comment upon his accounts of Pascal’s wager and Hume on miracles. My overall judgment is that this is the very best book on arguments about the existence of God that has yet appeared.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  40. Graham Oppy (2004). Maydole's 2QS5 Argument. Philo 7 (2):203-211.
    This paper is a reply to Robert Maydole’s “The Modal Perfection Argument for the Existence of a Supreme Being,” published in Philo 6, 2, 2003. I argue that Maydole’s Modal Perfection Argument fails, and that there is no evident way in which it can be repaired.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  41. Graham Oppy (2001). Reply to Langtry. Sophia 40 (1):73-80.
    This paper is a response to Bruce Langtry's criticisms of views advanced in my book *Ontological Arguments and Belief in God*. In particular, the paper discusses his criticisms of "the general objection" to ontological arguments that is developed in that work.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  42. Graham Oppy (1997). Pantheism, Quantification and Mereology. The Monist 80:320-36.
    This paper offers a taxonomy of pantheist positions, and an analysis of a mereological ontological argument.
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  43. Graham Oppy (1993). Makin's Ontological Argument Again. Philosophy 68:234.
    This paper is a response to Makin's response to my previous criticisms of his ontological argument. (References to the preceding literature are provided in the paper.).
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  44. Graham Oppy (1993). Makin's Ontological Argument (Again). Philosophy 68 (264):234 - 239.
    This paper is a reply to Stephen Makin's response to my previous criticism of his defense of a conceptual ontological argument. (All relevant bibliographical details are provided in this paper.).
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  45. Graham Oppy (1993). Modal Theistic Arguments. Sophia 32 (2):17-24.
    This paper discusses a range of modal ontological arguments. It is claimed that these modal ontological arguments fail because they depend upon controversial assumptions about the nature of modal space.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  46. Graham Oppy (1991). Makin on the Ontological Argument. Philosophy 66 (255):106 - 114.
    This paper is a critique of Stephen Makin's ontological argument. To some extent, the argument of this paper is recapitulated in *Ontological Arguments and Belief in God* (CUP, 1996).
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  47. T. Parent, The Modal Ontological Argument Meets Modal Fictionalism.
    This paper attacks the modal ontological argument, as advocated by Plantinga among others. Whereas other criticisms in the literature reject one of its premises, the present line is that the argument is invalid. This becomes apparent once we run the argument assuming fictionalism about possible worlds. Broadly speaking, the problem is that if one defines “x” as something that exists, it does not follow that there is anything satisfying the definition. Yet unlike non-modal ontological arguments, the modal argument commits this (...)
    Remove from this list  
    Translate
      Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  48. T. Parent (2015). On the PROVER9 Ontological Argument. Philosophia 43 (2):475-483.
    Oppenheimer & Zalta have re-formulated their non-modal version of the ontological argument, with the help of PROVER9, an automated reasoning engine. The authors end up rejecting the new argument; however, the theist has a rejoinder worth considering. But after presenting the rejoinder, I highlight that the conceivability of the being does not imply its possibility. One lesson is that even non-modal ontological arguments must engage modal matters concerning God. Another lesson is that if PROVER9 is able to derive a conclusion (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  49. Woosuk Park (2003). On the Motivations of Goedel's Ontological Proof. Modern Schoolman 80 (2):144-153.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  50. Alvin Plantinga (1992). The Nature of Necessity. Clarendon Press.
    This book, one of the first full-length studies of the modalities to emerge from the debate to which Saul Kripke, David Lewis, Ruth Marcus, and others are contributing, is an exploration and defense of the notion of modality de re, the idea that objects have both essential and accidental properties. Plantinga develops his argument by means of the notion of possible worlds and ranges over such key problems as the nature of essence, transworld identity, negative existential propositions, and the existence (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   243 citations  
1 — 50 / 59