Modified Gaunilo-Type Objections Against Modal Ontological Arguments

Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Modal ontological arguments are often claimed to be immune to the flqqperfect islandfrqq objection of Gaunilo, because necessary existence does not apply to material, contingent things. But Gaunilo’s strategy can be reformulated: we can speak of non-contingent beings, like quasi-Gods or evil God. The paper is intended to show that we can construct ontological arguments for the existence of such beings, and that those arguments are equally plausible as theistic modal argument. This result does not show that this argument is fallacious, but it shows that it is dialectically ineffective as an argument for theism.
No keywords specified (fix it)
(categorize this paper)
PhilPapers/Archive ID
Upload history
Archival date: 2018-03-14
View other versions
Added to PP index

Total views
276 ( #19,698 of 57,106 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
31 ( #24,745 of 57,106 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.