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
    Logical consistency (absence of contradiction) is not suf... — Carmelics
    Home/Modality & Possibility
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→The ontological argument fails because we cannot know or rationally presume that it is really possible for the divine perfections to be jointly exemplified.

    Logical consistency (absence of contradiction) is not sufficient to establish real possibility.

    Modality & Possibility
    ?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.

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

    Topics

    Modality & Possibility

    Connections

    1 topic

    Natural Theology2 linked

    Related

    The ontological argument fails because we cannot know or rationally presume that...

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Modality & Possibility
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    There are ways of being impossible that do not involve logical contradictions.
    We cannot determine whether God, conceived as having necessary existence, is rea...

    Similar

    Some real possibilities and impossibilities are not grounded in the pr...85%Agents with beliefs are instead required only to be consistent (unable...85%There are real possibilities that are not grounded in the principle of...84%The consistency paradox only seems to arise due to a mistaken belief a...84%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: natural-theology
    View source passageHide passage
    Kant’s most pressing criticism, in our view, goes back to the issue raised by Mersenne: we cannot determine whether God (conceived as having necessary existence or not) is really possible. Kant grants to Leibniz that the notion of a most perfect being may not involve a logical contradiction, but he argues that this is not enough to show that it is really possible, for there are ways of being impossible that do not involve logical contradictions (A602/B630). The implication for the ontological ar

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective