Off-campus access
Using PhilPapers from home?
Click here to configure this browser for off-campus access.
- Daniel A. Dombrowski (2006). Rethinking the Ontological Argument: A Neoclassical Theistic Response. Cambridge University Press.In recent years, the ontological argument and theistic metaphysics have been criticized by philosophers working in both the analytic and continental traditions. Responses to these criticisms have primarily come from philosophers who make use of the traditional, and problematic, concept of God. In this volume, Daniel A. Dombrowski defends the ontological argument against its contemporary critics, but he does so by using a neoclassical or process concept of God, thereby strengthening the case for a contemporary theistic metaphysics. Relying on the thought of Charles Hartshorne, he builds on Hartshorne's crucial distinction between divine existence and divine actuality, which enables neoclassical defenders of the ontological argument to avoid the familiar criticism that the argument moves illegitimately from an abstract concept to concrete reality. His argument, thus, avoids the problems inherent in the traditional concept of God as static.
Similar books and articles
CHAPTER ONE A "COPERNICAN REVOLUTION" IN THEOLOGICAL METHOD A. Introduct1on The
subject of theology is the history of the communion of God with man and of ...
It has become somewhat ontologically fashionable for theists to embrace anti-realist views of abstract objects. On pain of consistency, however, I will argue that any theist who accepts the S5 ontological argument for the existence of God should also accept a parallel S5 ontological argument for the existence of abstract objects. This is because the same ontological and modal inferences thought to demonstrate the existence of God can also be used to demonstrate the existence of numbers. I further argue that being ontologically consistent here might come at the price of being theologically unacceptable, as the argument for numbers would seem to vindicate a platonistic view of abstracta—but platonism is incompatible with the traditional concept of God. I conclude by suggesting what I see as the only way out of this dilemma, which is to embrace a view akin Augustine’s where abstracta exist “nowhere but in the very mind of the Creator.” Something like the Augustinian view of abstracta, therefore, can be seen as an indirect theological consequence of the S5 ontological argument for the existence of God.
Proof and perception : the context of the argumentum cartesianum -- Refutations of atheism : ontological arguments in English philosophy, 1652-1705 -- Being and intuition : Malebranche's appropriation of the argument -- An adequate conception : the argument in Spinoza's philosophy -- Ontological arguments in Leibniz and the German enlightenment -- Kant's systematic critique of the ontological argument -- Hegel's reconstruction of the argument.
No categories
No categories
No categories
The ontological argument is one of the most intriguing lines of reasoning in Western thought. Leaving behind debates over the proper relation between science and religion, it makes a simple move from conceptual analysis to existence in order to prove the existence of god. The ontological argument will be reviewed against the background of the contemporary debate on thought experiments. Assuming that the ontological argument fails as a philosophical proof, I will argue that its move from concept to existence might best be understood as a thought experiment of revealed theology (a theology based on revelation – unlike philosophical theology/natural theology). Viewed from this perspective it makes sense that Anselm of Canterbury offered his versions of the ontological argument in the form of a prayer, which, presupposing the existence of god, seems to run counter to a proof of god's existence.
No categories
No categories
Discussion of Daniel A. Dombrowski, Rethinking the Ontological Argument: A Neoclassical Theistic Response
|
|
There are no threads in this forum |
Nothing in this forum yet.

