Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The traditional definition of an ontological argument was given by Immanuel Kant. [3] He contrasted the ontological argument (literally any argument "concerned with being") [4] with the cosmological and physio-theoretical arguments. [5] According to the Kantian view, ontological arguments are those founded through a priori reasoning. [3]
The ontological argument, first proposed by Anselm of Canterbury, attempts to prove the existence of the divine. It defines God as the greatest conceivable being. From this definition it concludes that God must exist since God would not be the greatest conceivable being if God lacked existence. [169]
The argument is in a line of development that goes back to Anselm of Canterbury (1033–1109). St. Anselm's ontological argument, in its most succinct form, is as follows: "God, by definition, is that for which no greater can be conceived. God exists in the understanding.
Definition, stipulating uniqueness ∀x. x ∈ P & ∃y. T(y, ‘x’) ⊇ x ∈ I What is said and understood is in the mind. Assumption, on T def., g ∈ I What is understood by the Fool of the. definition is in his intellect. ∀ i. ∀i*. i* ∈ U, i ∈ V, i > i* Whatever is in the intellect and also in. reality is greater than that which ...
The Transcendental Argument for the existence of God (TAG) is an argument that attempts to prove the existence of God by appealing to the necessary conditions for the possibility of experience and knowledge. [1] A version was formulated by Immanuel Kant in his 1763 work The Only Possible Argument in Support of a Demonstration of the Existence ...
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]
An ontology is a description (like a formal specification of a program) of the concepts and relationships that can formally exist for an agent or a community of agents. This definition is consistent with the usage of ontology as set of concept definitions, but more general. And it is a different sense of the word than its use in philosophy. [17]
Thus, complex hypotheses must predict data much better than do simple hypotheses before researchers reject the simple hypotheses. Recent advances employ information theory, a close cousin of likelihood, which uses Occam's razor in the same way. The choice of the "shortest tree" relative to a not-so-short tree under any optimality criterion ...