Studia Neoaristotelica 4 (1):28-35 (2007)

Authors
Paul Edward Oppenheimer
Stanford University
Edward Zalta
Stanford University
Abstract
The authors evaluate the soundness of the ontological argument they developed in their 1991 paper. They focus on Anselm’s first premise, which asserts that there is a conceivable thing than which nothing greater can be conceived. After casting doubt on the argument Anselm uses in support of this premise, the authors show that there is a formal reading on which it is true. Such a reading can be used in a sound reconstruction of the argument. After this reconstruction is developed in precise detail, the authors show that the conclusion, a reading of the claim “God exists”, does not quite achieve the end Anselm desired.
Keywords Catholic Tradition  History of Philosophy  Philosophy and Religion
Categories (categorize this paper)
ISBN(s) 1214-8407
DOI studneoar20074114
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 64,231
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.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

On the Logic of the Ontological Argument.Paul E. Oppenheimer & Edward N. Zalta - 1991 - Philosophical Perspectives 5:509-529.
Anselm’s Argument Reconsidered.Gareth B. Matthews - 2010 - Review of Metaphysics 64 (1):31-54.
Does Anselm Beg the Question?Keith Burgess-Jackson - 2014 - International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 76 (1):5-18.
Anselm and Russell.Maciej Nowicki - 2006 - Logic and Logical Philosophy 15 (4):355-368.
The Ontological Argument and Russell's Antinomy.Sara L. Uckelman - 2009 - Logic and Logical Philosophy 18 (3-4):309-312.
Reality and Existence in Anselm.Stephen Priest - 2000 - Heythrop Journal 41 (4):461–462.
A Careful Reading of St. Anselm’s Ontological Argument.Clint I. Barrett - 2011 - Philosophy and Theology 23 (2):217-230.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2017-02-16

Total views
10 ( #877,894 of 2,455,389 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #449,037 of 2,455,389 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes