Musings on Saint Anselm’s Dilemma
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.53439/stdfyt43.22.2019.5-12Keywords:
ordered ontology, bounded ontology, greatnessAbstract
In this contribution we suggest two simple contentions: i) that Saint Anselm’s ontological argument, as presented in the Proslogion, only makes sense if embedded in an ordered and bounded ontology; and ii) that an interpretation of the main premise of the argument, within such ontology, produces a dilemma that demands a new revision of the argument.
Downloads
References
Barth, K. (1960). Anselm: fides quaerens intellectum, trans. by Ian W. Robertson. Richmond: John Knox Press.
Brecher, R. (1974). ‘Greatness’ in Anselm’s Ontological Argument, The Philosophical Quarterly 24, 95, 97-105. https://doi.org/10.2307/2217714
Gilson, É. (1934). Sens et nature de l’argument de saint Anselme, Archives d’Histoire Doctrinale et Littéraire du Moyen-âge, 9, 5-51. http://www.jstor.org/stable/44402921
Harsthorne, Ch. (1961). The Logic of the Ontological Argument. The Journal of Philosophy 58(17), 471-473. https://doi.org/10.2307/2023023
Malcolm, N. (1960). Anselm’s Ontological Arguments. The Philosophical Review 69(1), 41-62. https://doi.org/10.2307/2182266
McMahon, R. (2006) Understanding the Medieval Meditative Ascent. Washington: The Catholic University Press.
Niemeyer Findlay, J. (1948). Can God’s Existence Be Disproved? Mind, 57(226), 176-183. https://doi.org/10.1093/mind/LVII.226.176
Oppenheimer, P. and Zalta, E. (1991) On the Logic of the Ontological Argument, ed. J. Tomberlin, Philosophical Perspectives 5: The Philosophy of Religion. Atascadero: Ridgeview.
Plantinga, A. (1974) The Nature of Necessity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Stolz, A. (1967) Anselm’s Theology in the Proslogion, ed. John Hick and Arthur C. McGill, The Many-Faced Argument. New York: McMillan.
