Anselm’s Equivocation

Philo 7 (1):47-56 (2004)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Although most agree that St. Anselm’s ontological argument is problematic, there is no consensus as to what, exactly, is the flaw in the argument. In this essay, I propose what I take to be a novel criticism of the argument. Specifically, I claim that Anselm is guilty of an equivocation in his use of the word “God,” using it sometimes to refer to a being and sometimes to refer to a concept. Any attempt to remove this equivocation, I show, is doomed to failure; it is impossible to render the argument (or some version thereof) sound.

Analytics

Added to PP
2011-01-09

Downloads
289 (#54,089)

6 months
109 (#33,501)

Historical graph of downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.
How can I increase my downloads?