Switch to: References

Citations of:

Response to Gettings

Analysis 60 (4):363-367 (2000)

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Maydole’s 2QS5 Argument.Graham Oppy - 2004 - Philo 7 (2):203-211.
    This paper is a reply to Robert Maydole’s “The Modal Perfection Argument for the Existence of a Supreme Being,” published in Philo 6, 2, 2003. I argue that Maydole’s Modal Perfection Argument fails, and that there is no evident way in which it can be repaired.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • The Ontological Argument Simplified.Gareth B. Matthews & Lynne Rudder Baker - 2010 - Analysis 70 (2):210-212.
    The ontological argument in Anselm’s Proslogion II continues to generate a remarkable store of sophisticated commentary and criticism. However, in our opinion, much of this literature ignores or misrepresents the elegant simplicity of the original argument. The dialogue below seeks to restore that simplicity, with one important modification. Like the original, it retains the form of a reductio, which we think is essential to the argument’s great genius. However, it seeks to skirt the difficult question of whether 'exists' is a (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   11 citations  
  • The Pinocchio Paradox.Peter Eldridge-Smith & Veronique Eldridge-Smith - 2010 - Analysis 70 (2):212-215.
    The Pinocchio paradox, devised by Veronique Eldridge-Smith in February 2001, is a counter-example to solutions to the Liar that restrict the use or definition of semantic predicates. Pinocchio’s nose grows if and only if what he is stating is false, and Pinocchio says ‘My nose is growing’. In this statement, ‘is growing’ has its normal meaning and is not a semantic predicate. If Pinocchio’s nose is growing it is because he is saying something false; otherwise, it is not growing. ‘Because’ (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  • Conceptual Truth Versus Empirical Truth.William Icefield - unknown
    Ontological arguments seek to affirm existence of a priori empirical truths by use of logic. I focus on Godel's ontological proof. Axioms utilized are definitional by usual standards, which is one reason why controversies surrounding the proof still linger on. I argue that logic without empirical supports can only be used to prove conceptual truths. In order for logic to prove empirical truths, definitions and axioms used must be based on established truths of actual reality. How Thomas Aquinas's criticism of (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Pruss's Ontological Arguments.Graham Oppy - 2009 - Religious Studies 45 (3):355-363.
    First, I suggest that it is possible to make some further improvements upon the Gödelian ontological arguments that Pruss develops. Then, I argue that it is possible to parody Pruss's Gödelian ontological arguments in a way that shows that they make no contribution towards 'lowering the probability of atheism and raising the probability of theism'. I conclude with some remarks about ways in which the arguments of this paper can be extended to apply to the whole family of Gödelian ontological (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • A Gödelian Ontological Argument Improved.Alexander R. Pruss - 2009 - Religious Studies 45 (3):347-353.
    Gödel's ontological argument is a formal argument for a being defined in terms of the concept of a positive property. I shall defend several versions of Gödel's argument, using weaker premises than Anderson's (1990) version, and avoiding Oppy's (1996 and 2000) parody refutations.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  • Ontological Arguments.Graham Oppy - 2014 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
    Latest version of my SEP entry on ontological arguments, which first appeared in 1996. General discussion of ontological arguments. Includes a brief historical overview, a taxonomy of different kinds of ontological arguments, a brief survey of objections to the different kinds of ontological arguments identified in the taxonomy, and more extended discussions of Anselm's ontological argument (Proslogion 2), Godel's ontological argument, and Plantinga's ontological argument.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   11 citations