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
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that The ontological argument for God's existence is unsound.

    ?Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.The ontological argument claims that because the idea of God includes existence, God's existence can be established via conceptual analysis alone.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.By parity of reasoning, the same logic would establish the existence of a maximally perfect island and an existent lion, since those ideas also include existence.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The conclusion that a maximally perfect island and an existent lion necessarily exist is absurd.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Kant demonstrated that existence is not a predicate that adds to a concept's content, but merely posits the concept as instantiated.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If existence is not a real predicate, then no analysis of the concept of God can yield existential conclusions, rendering the ontological argument's inference formally invalid.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.This Kantian objection applies universally and thus dissolves the parody problem: neither God nor perfect islands exist by conceptual necessity, for the same structural reason.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Gaunilo's parody and Kant's critique converge on a single principle: modal status cannot be derived solely from conceptual containment of perfection.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Plantinga's modal ontological argument illicitly moves from the coherence of possible maximal greatness to its actualization in the actual world via S5, but S5's axiom that possible necessity entails actual necessity is not analytically guaranteed for contingent beings.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Without independent grounds for granting that maximal greatness is instantiated in some possible world, the modal argument begs the question by smuggling existence into the premise set.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

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