Kant's insight holds: existence is not a predicate that adds to a concept, so 'necessary existence' as a God-property smuggles existential force into what should be a purely conceptual analysis.

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

No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

Existence is not a predicate(Kant's key counter-argument against the ontological argument): A claim that 'existing' is fundamentally different from other qualities (like 'being powerful' or 'being good')—you can't prove something exists just by listing its properties the way you list colors or sizes.
Kant(as used in epistemology and metaphysics): Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) was an influential German philosopher who argued that our minds shape how we experience reality, and that we can only truly know things as they appear to us, not as they are in themselves.
Necessary existence(Contrasted with contingent existence in discussion of God's mode of being): Existence that is not contingent; the being does not just happen to exist or not exist.
conceptual analysis(Jackson 1998a, 28): The activity of elucidating our original shared understanding of a target expression, showing that a putative reduction respects the original meaning of that expression.

Based on where you are in your exploration