Was Gaunilo Right in his Criticism of Anselm? A Contemporary Perspective

Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
Gaunilo argued that Anselm could prove the existence of many perfect objects, for example, the happiest island, that is, happier than any other island. More formally, Gaunilo’s arguments were intended to show that the sentence “God exists‘ does not follow from premises accepted by Anselm. Contemporary versions of the ontological proof use the maximalization procedure in order to demonstrate that God exists as the most perfect being. This paper argues that this method, which is based on maximalization, is not sufficient to prove God’s existence. Thus, a “contemporary Gaunilo‘ can repeat objections raised by his ancestor.
Keywords
No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories
(categorize this paper)
PhilPapers/Archive ID
WOLWGR
Upload history
Archival date: 2018-03-14
View other versions
Added to PP index
2017-03-10

Total views
955 ( #3,590 of 53,509 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
369 ( #882 of 53,509 )

How can I increase my downloads?

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