Ratio Anselmi Revisited
The proof of Gods existence, known as Ratio Anselmi, is being analyzed. Four first-order theories are constructed to mirror versions of Anselms reasoning. Gods existence is shown to be provable in all of them. A traditional objection to the employment of a concept of God is overruled. And yet, An...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
University of Innsbruck in cooperation with the John Hick Centre for Philosophy of Religion at the University of Birmingham
[2012]
|
| In: |
European journal for philosophy of religion
Year: 2012, Volume: 4, Issue: 2, Pages: 127-146 |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (doi) Volltext (teilw. kostenfrei) |
| Parallel Edition: | Non-electronic
|
| Summary: | The proof of Gods existence, known as Ratio Anselmi, is being analyzed. Four first-order theories are constructed to mirror versions of Anselms reasoning. Gods existence is shown to be provable in all of them. A traditional objection to the employment of a concept of God is overruled. And yet, Anselms proof is eventually found to be incorrect. The error attributed to Anselm consists in an illegitimate use of the words greater and conceivable, and is identified as quaternio terminorum or petitio principii, depending on circumstances. It is claimed that there is no direct way to improve the argument. |
|---|---|
| Contains: | Enthalten in: European journal for philosophy of religion
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.24204/ejpr.v4i2.300 |