Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Are scrutability conditionals rationally deniable?Jens Kipper & Zeynep Soysal - 2021 - Analysis 81 (3):452-461.
    Chalmers has argued that Bayesianism supports the existence of a priori truths, since it entails that scrutability conditionals are not rationally revisable. However, as we argue, Chalmers's arguments leave open that every proposition is rationally deniable, which would be devastating for large parts of his philosophical program. We suggest that Chalmers should appeal to well-known convergence theorems to argue that ideally rational subjects converge on the truth of scrutability conditionals. However, our discussion reveals that showing that these theorems apply in (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • LeMans’s gontological argument.Stephen Kearns - 2021 - Analysis 81 (3):447-452.
    LeMans’s gontological argument aims to prove the non-existence of God on the basis that it is possible to conceive of a being that is greater than any actual thing. If God were actual, then it would be possible to conceive of something greater than God. As this is not possible, God does not exist.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Idealistic Ontological Arguments in Royce, Collingwood, and Others.Kevin J. Harrelson - 2012 - Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society 48 (4):411.
    This essay examines how, in the early twentieth century, ontological arguments were employed in the defense of metaphysical idealism. The idealists of the period tended to grant that ontological arguments defy our usual expectations in logic, and so they were less concerned with the formal properties of Anselmian arguments. They insisted, however, that ontological arguments are indispensable, and they argued that we can trust argumentation as such only if we presume that there is a valid ontological argument. In the first (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • On behalf of the devil: A parody of Anselm revisited.Timothy Chambers - 2000 - Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 100 (1):93–113.
    This paper treats a question which first arose in these Proceedings: Can Anselm's ontological argument be inverted so as to yield parallel proofs for the existence (or non-existence) of a least (or worst) conceivable being? Such 'devil parodies' strike some commentators as innocuous curiosities, or redundant challenges which are no more troubling than other parodies found in the literature (e.g., Gaunilo's Island). I take issue with both of these allegations; devil parodies, I argue, have the potential to pose substantive, and (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation