Graduate studies at Western
Philosophical Perspectives 5:509-529 (1991)
|Abstract||In this paper, the authors show that there is a reading of St. Anselm's ontological argument in Proslogium II that is logically valid (the premises entail the conclusion). This reading takes Anselm's use of the definite description "that than which nothing greater can be conceived" seriously. Consider a first-order language and logic in which definite descriptions are genuine terms, and in which the quantified sentence "there is an x such that..." does not imply "x exists". Then, using an ordinary logic of descriptions and a connected greater-than relation, God's existence logically follows from the claims: (a) there is a conceivable thing than which nothing greater is conceivable, and (b) if <em>x</em> doesn't exist, something greater than x can be conceived. To deny the conclusion, one must deny one of the premises. However, the argument involves no modal inferences and, interestingly, Descartes' ontological argument can be derived from it.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Yujin Nagasawa (2007). Millican on the Ontological Argument. Mind 116 (464):1027-1040.
Hugh S. Chandler (1993). Some Ontological Arguments. Faith and Philosophy 10 (Jan):18-180.
Chris Heathwood (2011). The Relevance of Kant's Objection to Anselm's Ontological Argument. Religious Studies 47 (3):345 - 357.
Elijah Millgram (2004). The Ontological Meta-Argument. Croatian Journal of Philosophy 4 (3):331-334.
Lynne Rudder Baker & Gareth Matthews (2010). Anselm's Argument Reconsidered. Review of Metaphysics 64 (1):31-54.
Edward N. Zalta (2007). Reflections on the Logic of the Ontological Argument. Studia Neoaristotelica 4 (1):28-35.
Robert Maydole (2003). The Modal Perfection Argument for the Existence of a Supreme Being. Philo 6 (2):299-313.
Paul Oppenheimer & Edward N. Zalta (2011). A Computationally-Discovered Simplification of the Ontological Argument. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 89 (2):333 - 349.
Paul E. Oppenheimer & Edward N. Zalta (2007). Reflections on the Logic of the Ontological Argument. Studia Neoaristotelica 4 (1):28-35.
Edward N. Zalta (2007). O logice ontologického důkazu. Studia Neoaristotelica 4 (1):5-27.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads86 ( #10,569 of 722,940 )
Recent downloads (6 months)29 ( #4,241 of 722,940 )
How can I increase my downloads?