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
    It remains an open question whether some hitherto undisco... — Carmelics
    Home/Natural Theology
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    It remains an open question whether some hitherto undiscovered ontological argument for the existence of God could succeed.

    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.Even if the foregoing analyses are correct, no argument has been given for the general conclusion that no ontological argument can be successful.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Even if all kinds of ontological arguments produced to date are clearly unsuccessful, that does not rule out the possibility of a new kind that does succeed.
      ?

      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 exposes a structural flaw intrinsic to all ontological arguments, not merely contingent versions.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Any argument inferring necessary existence from conceptual analysis alone must treat existence as a perfection or property, which Kant showed is categorically illegitimate.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Therefore the failure-condition is not accidental to past arguments but is built into the ontological form itself, closing the space for future success.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Frege and Russell's formal logic establishes that existence is a second-order predicate about concepts, not a first-order property instantiated by individuals.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Ontological arguments require that maximal greatness or necessary existence function as a first-order property God uniquely possesses, which modern predicate logic disallows.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Since this logical constraint is not empirical but formal, no future reformulation escapes it without abandoning the ontological argument's defining a priori character.
      ?

      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

    Related

    Any argument inferring necessary existence from conceptual analysis alone must t...Even if all kinds of ontological arguments produced to date are clearly unsucces...Even if the foregoing analyses are correct, no argument has been given for the g...Frege and Russell's formal logic establishes that existence is a second-order pr...
    +4 moreShow less
    Kant's critique that existence is not a predicate exposes a structural flaw intr...Ontological arguments require that maximal greatness or necessary existence func...Since this logical constraint is not empirical but formal, no future reformulati...Therefore the failure-condition is not accidental to past arguments but is built...

    Similar

    No known ontological argument for the existence of God is persuasive.89%The ontological argument for God's existence is unsound.85%There is fairly widespread consensus, even amongst theists, that no kn...85%The ontological argument eliminates the second alternative — that God ...85%

    Source

    AI-extracted2/3 agreementValid
    SEP: ontological-arguments
    Even if the forgoing analyses are correct, it is important to note that no argument has been given...
    View source passageHide passage
    Even if the forgoing analyses are correct, it is important to note that no argument has been given for the conclusion that no ontological argument can be successful. Even if all of the kinds of arguments produced to date are pretty clearly unsuccessful—i.e., not such as ought to give non-theists reason to accept the conclusion that God exists—it remains an open question whether there is some other kind of hitherto undiscovered ontological argument which does succeed. (Perhaps it is worth adding here that there is fairly widespread consensus, even amongst theists, that no known ontological argu...
    Extraction notes

    Validity: The premises faithfully capture the passage's reasoning that the absence of a general proof of impossibility, combined with the failure of existing arguments not entailing future failure, together support the conclusion that success remains an open question.

    Confidence: Clear argumentative structure explicitly stated in the text.

    Details

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