New Aspects of Omnipotence and Necessity in Anselm: M. J. A. O'CONNOR
Religious Studies 4 (1):133-146 (1968)
Abstract
Anselm presented his ontological argument in three main forms. In Proslogion II he argued that the very concept of God implies his actual existence. In Reply to Gaunilo —the argument from aseity—he argued that the conception of God as an eternal existent rules out his conception as a merely possible existent. In Proslogion III he argued that the concept of God implies his actual existence as logically necessary. Each of these arguments has its traditional refutation. Against Proslogion II it is argued that the analytic use of ‘exists’ conceptually and descriptively is logically distinct from its synthetic use as an empirical judgement. Against the argument from aseity the same point is made about ‘exists eternally’, and against the detail of his argument it is said that the second premise is not a proposition with a single implication, but a disjunction. Against Proslogion III it is argued that ‘logically necessary existence’ is a meaningless notion. This paper is designed to show that Anselm's arguments may be refuted without recourse to these traditional criticisms; that each of his arguments contains at least one further error, of equal if not more importance, which has passed unnoticed. If this appears to be bringing yet further coals to Newcastle, the revival of the argument by Hartshorne and Malcolm, and the supposed ‘ontological disproof’ by Findlay, may indicate our need of further fuel.Author's Profile
DOI
10.1017/s0034412500003437
My notes
Similar books and articles
What does the second form of the ontological argument prove?H. Jong Kim - 2004 - International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 56 (1):17 - 40.
The non-Christian influence on Anselm’s Proslogion argument.Nancy Kendrick - 2011 - International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 69 (2):73-89.
Anselm and the ontological argument.Graham Oppy - 2011 - In Jeff Jordan (ed.), Philosophy of Religion: The Key Thinkers. London: Continuum. pp. 22-43.
Is Existence a Predicate in Anselm's Argument?: DAVID M. LOCHHEAD.David M. Lochhead - 1966 - Religious Studies 2 (1):121-127.
Reading Anselm's Proslogion: The History of Anselm's Argument and its Significance Today.Ian Logan - 2008 - Ashgate.
St. Anselm's Proslogion: With a Reply on Behalf of the Fool by Gaunilo and the Author's Reply to Gaunilo.M. J. Charlesworth (ed.) - 1965 - University of Notre Dame Press.
Analytics
Added to PP
2011-05-29
Downloads
30 (#391,301)
6 months
1 (#449,220)
2011-05-29
Downloads
30 (#391,301)
6 months
1 (#449,220)
Historical graph of downloads