Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 100 (1):93–113 (2000)
|Abstract||This paper treats a question which first arose in these Proceedings: Can Anselm's ontological argument be inverted so as to yield parallel proofs for the existence (or non-existence) of a least (or worst) conceivable being? Such 'devil parodies' strike some commentators as innocuous curiosities, or redundant challenges which are no more troubling than other parodies found in the literature (e.g., Gaunilo's Island). I take issue with both of these allegations; devil parodies, I argue, have the potential to pose substantive, and novel, challenges to Anselm's ontological argument|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Yujin Nagasawa (2007). Millican on the Ontological Argument. Mind 116 (464):1027 - 1039.
Ian Logan (2008). Reading Anselm's Proslogion: The History of Anselm's Argument and its Significance Today. Ashgate Pub. Ltd..
Anselm (1979). St. Anselm's Proslogion with a Reply on Behalf of the Fool. University of Notre Dame Press.
Mark Owen Webb (2005). In Defense of Anselm. Philo 8 (1):55-58.
Chris Heathwood (2011). The Relevance of Kant's Objection to Anselm's Ontological Argument. Religious Studies 47:345–57.
Keith Burgess-Jackson (1994). Anselm, Gaunilo, and Lost Island. Philosophy and Theology 8 (3):243-249.
Yujin Nagasawa (2010). The Ontological Argument and the Devil. Philosophical Quarterly 60 (238):72-91.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads29 ( #42,388 of 549,087 )
Recent downloads (6 months)5 ( #15,152 of 549,087 )
How can I increase my downloads?