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
    Hume's and Kant's criticisms of the ontological argument ... — Carmelics
    Home/Natural Theology
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Hume's and Kant's criticisms of the ontological argument do not target the strongest version of Anselm's argument found in Proslogion chapter 3.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.The strongest version of Anselm's ontological argument is found in Proslogion chapter 3.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Proslogion chapter 3 implies a modal distinction between existing necessarily and existing contingently.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Hume's and Kant's criticisms are not directed at this modal version of the argument.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Kant's critique that existence is not a predicate applies equally to necessary existence, since necessity modifies the concept, not reality.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If 'exists necessarily' is still a predicate attributed to a concept, Kant's objection that no predicate can guarantee extra-mental existence remains fully operative.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Proslogion 3's modal framing does not escape the is/ought gap between conceptual necessity and ontological necessity that Kant's Critique identifies.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Hume's Dialogues Part IX argues that whatever can be conceived as existing can be conceived as not existing, which directly targets modal necessity claims.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If conceivability of non-existence applies to any being, including a necessarily existing one, then Proslogion 3's modal distinction collapses under Humean scrutiny.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Scholarly consensus from Oppy and Sobel holds that Hume's conceivability argument is broad enough to undermine necessary existence as a coherent modal category.
      ?

      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.

    Topics

    Natural Theology

    Connections

    1 topic

    Modality & Possibility1 linked

    Related

    Hume's Dialogues Part IX argues that whatever can be conceived as existing can b...Hume's and Kant's criticisms are not directed at this modal version of the argum...If 'exists necessarily' is still a predicate attributed to a concept, Kant's obj...If conceivability of non-existence applies to any being, including a necessarily...
    +5 moreShow less
    Kant's critique that existence is not a predicate applies equally to necessary e...Proslogion 3's modal framing does not escape the is/ought gap between conceptual...Proslogion chapter 3 implies a modal distinction between existing necessarily an...Scholarly consensus from Oppy and Sobel holds that Hume's conceivability argumen...The strongest version of Anselm's ontological argument is found in Proslogion ch...

    Similar

    The strongest version of Anselm's ontological argument is found in Pro...90%The inconsistency present in Gödel's original ontological argument is ...82%Collingwood's defense of the ontological argument in An Essay on Philo...82%Premise (3) of the ontological argument is subject to a decisive chall...81%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: hartshorne
    View source passageHide passage
    He argues that Hume’s and Kant’s criticisms of the ontological argument of St. Anselm are not directed at the strongest version of his argument found in Proslogion, chapter 3. Here, he thinks, there is a modal distinction implied between existing necessarily and existing contingently. Hartshorne’s view is that existence alone might not be a real predicate, but existing necessarily certainly is. To say that something exists without the possibility of not existing is to say something significant a
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit