On Metcalf ’s Objections to the Modal Perfection Argument

Philo 8 (2):134-136 (2005)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This paper is a reply to Thomas Metcalf ’s “Entailment and ontological arguments: Reply to Maydole,” published in Philo 8, 2. Iargue that he fails to refute my Modal Perfection Argument for the existence of a Supreme Being, and that it remains arguably sound in the face of his alleged counterexamples and parody.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 74,429

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Maydole’s 2QS5 Argument.Graham Oppy - 2004 - Philo 7 (2):203-211.
Maydole on Ontological Arguments.Graham Oppy - 2012 - In Miroslaw Szatkowski (ed.), Ontological Proofs Today. Ontos Verlag. pp. 445.
Response to Maydole.Graham Oppy - 2012 - In Miroslaw Szatkowski (ed.), Ontological Proofs Today. Bydgoszcz: Ontos Verlag. pp. 445-68.
The Necessity of Perfection: Modal Versions of the Ontological Argument.John Thomas Birmingham - 2001 - Dissertation, University of California, Santa Barbara
Modal Theistic Arguments.Graham Oppy - 1993 - Sophia 32 (2):17-24.
Ontological Arguments.Graham Oppy - 2014 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

Analytics

Added to PP
2017-02-17

Downloads
13 (#760,158)

6 months
1 (#416,470)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references