Graduate studies at Western
Metaphysica 11 (1):17-37 (2010)
|Abstract||This paper provides an interpretation and evaluation of Spinozaâs highly original version of the ontological proof in terms of the concept of substance instead of the concept of perfection in the first book of his Ethics. Taking the lead from Kantâs critique of ontological arguments in the Critique of Pure Reason, the paper explores the underlying ontological and epistemological presuppositions of Spinozaâs proof. The main topics of consideration are the nature of Spinozaâs definitions, the way he conceives of the relation between a substance and its essence, and his conception of existence. Once clarity is shed upon these fundamental issues, it becomes possible to address the proof in its own terms. It is then easy to see that Kantâs objections miss their target and that the same is true of those advanced by another of the ontological argumentâs most famous critics, Bertrand Russell. Finally, several interpretations of Spinozaâs proof are proposed and critically evaluated; on all of them, the argument turns out to be either invalid or question-begging.|
|Keywords||Kant Russell Spinoza Ontological argument Ideas Possibilities|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Martin Lin (2007). Spinoza's Arguments for the Existence of God. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 75 (2):269-297.
Cecilia Wee (2012). Descartes's Ontological Proof of God's Existence. British Journal for the History of Philosophy 20 (1):23 - 40.
Patricia Marie Calton (2001). Hegel's Metaphysics of God: The Ontological Proof of a Trinitarian Divine Ontology. Ashgate Publishing.
Pierfrancesco Basile (2012). Russell on Spinoza's Substance Monism. Metaphysica 13 (1):27-41.
Hector Ferreiro (2012). El Argumento Ontológico y la Muerte de la Metafísica. Dos Visiones Complementarias: Kant y Hegel. Veritas 57 (3):99-120.
Srećko Kovač (2012). Modal Collapse in Gödel's Ontological Proof. In Miroslaw Szatkowski (ed.), Ontological Proofs Today. Ontos Verlag.
M. V. Dougherty (2002). The Importance of Cartesian Triangles: A New Look at Descartes's Ontological Argument. International Journal of Philosophical Studies 10 (1):35 – 62.
Gregor Damschen (2011). Questioning Gödel's Ontological Proof: Is Truth Positive? European Journal for Philosophy of Religion 3 (1):161-169.
John Edward Abbruzzese (2008). Do Descartes and St. Thomas Agree on the Ontological Proof? Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 89 (4):413-435.
Herbert Lamm (1940). The Relation of Concept and Demonstration in the Ontological Argument. [Chicago].
Nicholas Stang (forthcoming). Kant's Argument That Existence is Not a Determination. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research.
Olli Koistinen (2003). Spinoza's Proof of Necessitarianism. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 67 (2):283–310.
Andrew Chignell (2012). Kant, Real Possibility, and the Threat of Spinoza. Mind 121 (483):635-675.
Added to index2010-09-13
Total downloads23 ( #60,206 of 739,315 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,243 of 739,315 )
How can I increase my downloads?