God versus the Multiverse: An Ontological Argument against the Existence of a Supreme Being: With a Hopeful Alternative
Graduate studies at Western
In Death and Anti-Death, Volume 7: Nine Hundred Years After St. Anselm (1033-1109). Ria University Press (2009)
|Abstract||Anselm’s ontological argument for the existence of God is examined. It is concluded that Anselm errs in assuming the greatest "thing" must be a sentient being. The existence of God, then, is not established by Anselm’s argument, and is concluded to be unlikely for other reasons as well, one being that a perfected sentient being would be a logical impossibility. An afterlife and personal immortality are not precluded however; these goals could be reached by future scientific means. For now cryonics is advocated as a means to reach a more advanced future when death may be physically overcome|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|External links||This entry has no external links. Add one.|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
William L. Rowe (2009). Alvin Plantinga on the Ontological Argument. International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 65 (2):87 - 92.
Hugh S. Chandler (1993). Some Ontological Arguments. Faith and Philosophy 10 (Jan):18-180.
Yiftach J. H. Fehige (2009). Thought Experimenting with God. Revisiting the Ontological Argument. Neue Zeitschrift für Systematische Theologie Und Religionsphilosophie 51 (3).
Peter Millican (1989). The Devil's Advocate. Cogito 3 (3):193-207.
Eric Wilson (2010). The Ontological Argument Revisited: A Reply to Rowe. Forum Philosophicum 15 (1):37 - 44.
Luke Gelinas (2006). The Stoic Argument Ex Gradibus Entium. Phronesis 51 (1):49 - 73.
Lewis S. Feuer (1968). God, Guilt, and Logic: The Psychological Basis of the Ontological Argument. Inquiry 11 (1-4):257 – 281.
Lydia Schumacher (2011). The Lost Legacy of Anselm's Argument: Re-Thinking the Purpose of Proofs for the Existence of God. Modern Theology 27 (1):87 - 101.
Chad A. McIntosh (2010). S5, God, and Numbers. Res Cogitans 1 (1):63-78.
Lynne Rudder Baker & Gareth Matthews (2010). Anselm's Argument Reconsidered. Review of Metaphysics 64 (1):31-54.
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
Added to index2012-06-17
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?