Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Gödel's ontological proof is a formal argument by the mathematician Kurt Gödel (1906–1978) for the existence of God. The argument is in a line of development that goes back to Anselm of Canterbury (1033–1109).
He states that by taking the subject of God with all its predicates and then asserting that God exists, "I add no new predicate to the conception of God". He argues that the ontological argument works only if existence is a predicate; if this is not so, he claims the ontological argument is invalidated, as it is then conceivable a completely ...
Further treatments: In the Question of the Summa theologica: in Article I, Aquinas finds that the existence of God is not self-evident to humans. In Article II, he says that the approach of demonstration a posteriori can be used to go trace back to assert the a priori existence of God. Article III (i.e., the Five Ways) is a summary or ...
Other arguments for the existence of God have been proposed by St. Anselm, who formulated the first ontological argument; Thomas Aquinas, who presented his own version of the cosmological argument (the first way); René Descartes, who said that the existence of a benevolent God is logically necessary for the evidence of the senses to be meaningful.
Pages in category "Arguments for the existence of God" ... Argument in Support of a Demonstration of the Existence of God; Ontogenetic depth; Ontological argument; P.
In The Only Possible Argument, Kant questions both the ontological argument for God (as proposed by Anselm of Canterbury) and the argument from design. Kant argues that the internal possibility of all things presupposes some existence: [1] Accordingly, there must be something whose nonexistence would cancel all internal possibility whatsoever.
Morewedge referred to the argument as "Ibn Sina's ontological argument for the existence of God", and said that it was purely based on his analytic specification of this concept [the Necessary Existent]." [28] Steve A. Johnson and Toby Mayer said the argument was a hybrid of the two. [25] [28]
This argument posits that individuals essentially engage in a life-defining gamble regarding the belief in the existence of God. Pascal contends that a rational person should adopt a lifestyle consistent with the existence of God and actively strive to believe in God. The reasoning behind this stance lies in the potential outcomes: if God does ...