Statements: 321,452
Perspectives: 108,905
Topics: 42

There is a thing x and a magnitude m such that x exists in the understanding, and x exists in reality, and m is the magnitude of x, and it is not possible that there is a thing y and a magnitude n such that n is the magnitude of y and n > m.

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.Premise 1 (not quoted in passage)
?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.Premise 2 (not quoted in passage)
?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.Premise 3 (not quoted in passage)
?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

Reasons Against

2 perspectives

Reason against 1 of 2

1.Existence is not a real predicate that adds to the concept of a thing, but merely posits the subject with all its predicates (Kant, Critique of Pure Reason).
?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.If existence is not a magnitude-contributing property, then no comparison of magnitudes between existing and non-existing things is coherent.
?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.Therefore, the formal variable m cannot meaningfully quantify over existence as a greatness-conferring attribute.
?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

Reason against 2 of 2

1.The concept of a being with maximal magnitude is not guaranteed to be coherent; maxima across all perfections may be mutually incompatible (Findlay, 1948).
?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.If the set of possible magnitudes has no upper bound or if maximal values for distinct properties conflict, then no x satisfying the magnitude condition can be well-defined.
?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.A formally valid existential claim whose subject-concept is incoherent establishes nothing about reality.
?
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.

Topics

Natural Theology

Key Terms

Anselm's ontological argument(this statement closely mirrors the logical structure of Anselm's famous proof): A medieval philosophical argument (created by Saint Anselm) that tries to prove God exists by defining God as the greatest conceivable being and arguing that existence in reality makes something greater than existence only in the mind.
exists in reality(as used in ontology (the study of what exists)): Something that actually exists in the physical world, not just as a thought or imagination.
exists in the understanding(Anselm's ontological argument framework): A thing exists in the understanding when the expression referring to it is comprehended, even if the thing is not believed to exist in reality
magnitude(Zeno's argument against plurality; a thing lacking magnitude is indistinguishable from nothing): A property encompassing spatial extension, thickness, and bulk, without which a thing would be nothing (i.e., could be added or removed without effect)
modal logic / it is not possible(as used in logic and metaphysics): A type of reasoning about what is possible, impossible, necessary, or contingent rather than just what is true or false.

A formally valid existential claim whose subject-concept is incoherent establish...Existence is not a real predicate that adds to the concept of a thing, but merel...If existence is not a magnitude-contributing property, then no comparison of mag...If the set of possible magnitudes has no upper bound or if maximal values for di...

+5 more

Premise 1 (not quoted in passage)Premise 2 (not quoted in passage)Premise 3 (not quoted in passage)

Source

AI-extracted2/3 agreementValid

SEP: ontological-arguments

View source passage

(Hence) There is a thing x and a magnitude m such that x exist in the understanding, and x exists in reality, and m is the magnitude of x, and it it not possible that there is a thing y and a magnitude n such that n is the magnitude of y and n>m. (From 1, 2, 3)

Extraction notes

Validity: The source passage explicitly states this conclusion follows from premises 1, 2, and 3 (indicated by "Hence" and "From 1, 2, 3"), and the extracted argument accurately captures this inferential structure even though the premises themselves are not quoted in the passage excerpt.

Confidence: The passage presents only the conclusion of an argument, explicitly marked as following from premises 1, 2, and 3, which are not included in the excerpt. The argument structure is clear but the premises are unavailable.

Details

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

There is a thing x and a magnitude m such that x exists in the understanding, and x exists in reality, and m is the magnitude of x, and it is not possible that there is a thing y and a magnitude n such that n is the magnitude of y and n > m.

Reasons For

Reasons Against

Next step

Similar

Details