Maydole's 2QS5 Argument

Philo 7 (2):203-211 (2004)
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
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history Request removal from index
Download options
PhilPapers Archive

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy on self-archival     Papers currently archived: 12,703
External links
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library
References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Citations of this work BETA
Graham Oppy (2009). Pruss's Ontological Arguments. Religious Studies 45 (3):355-363.
Similar books and articles
Graham Oppy (2007). Maydole’s Modal Perfection Argument (Again). Philo: A Journal of Philosophy 10 (1):72-84.
Robert E. Maydole (1980). A Modal Model for Proving the Existence of God. American Philosophical Quarterly 17 (2):135 - 142.
Robert E. Maydole (2000). The Modal Third Way. International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 47 (1):1-28.
Robert E. Maydole (1975). Paradoxes and Many-Valued Set Theory. Journal of Philosophical Logic 4 (3):269 - 291.

Monthly downloads

Added to index


Total downloads

21 ( #90,587 of 1,413,232 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

1 ( #153,719 of 1,413,232 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature

Start a new thread
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.