Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Descartes and Leibniz argued that the ontological argumen... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→The ontological argument is unsound.

    Descartes and Leibniz argued that the ontological argument is sound conditional on the prior demonstration that the concept of a supremely perfect being is internally consistent.

    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Logical arguments require consistent concepts; an incoherent concept cannot ground valid deductive reasoning about existence.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Descartes and Leibniz showed that perfection-concepts require demonstration of non-contradiction before ontological proof proceeds.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Without consistency verification, one risks deriving existence from pseudo-concepts, as with Kant's problematic 100 thalers example.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Internal consistency of a concept does not establish that the concept refers to anything real in the actual world.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Leibniz never actually completed a rigorous consistency proof for 'supremely perfect being,' leaving the condition unmet.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Even if consistency is necessary, it may be insufficient—existence requires more than logical coherence of an idea.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Connections

    1 topic

    Problem of Evil1 linked

    Related

    Descartes and Leibniz showed that perfection-concepts require demonstration of n...Even if consistency is necessary, it may be insufficient—existence requires more...Internal consistency of a concept does not establish that the concept refers to ...Leibniz never actually completed a rigorous consistency proof for 'supremely per...
    +3 moreShow less
    Logical arguments require consistent concepts; an incoherent concept cannot grou...The ontological argument is unsound.Without consistency verification, one risks deriving existence from pseudo-conce...

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    2 (1 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit