In order to make this point, in the next section I will present a very simple, intuitive reconstruction of Anselm’s argument. Then, in the third section, I will show that since the argument thus reconstructed is obviously valid, and it would be foolish to challenge any other of its premises except the assumption that God does not exist in reality, it is a sound proof of God’s existence. Nevertheless, in the fourth section, I will argue further that despite its soundness, this proof can rationally be rejected by anyone who refuses to think..
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Proof and Implication in Mill's Philosophy of Logic.Geoffrey Scarre - 1984 - History and Philosophy of Logic 5 (1):19-37.
Saint Anselm's Proof: A Problem of Reference, Intentional Identity and Mutual Understanding.Gyula Klima - manuscript
„Quod Maius Est“. Der Springende Punkt in Anselms Ontologischem Argument.Hermann Weidemann - 2009 - Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 91 (1):1-20.
Reflections on the Logic of the Ontological Argument.Edward N. Zalta - 2007 - Studia Neoaristotelica 4 (1):28-35.
Mercy and Justice in St. Anselm's Proslogion.Gregory B. Sadler - 2006 - American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly 80 (1):41-61.
Schelling's Original Insight.C. Jeffrey Kinlaw - 2003 - American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly 77 (2):213-232.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads13 ( #355,056 of 2,171,691 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #326,424 of 2,171,691 )
How can I increase my downloads?