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

European Journal for Philosophy of Religion 4 (2):101--111 (2012)
  Copy   BIBTEX

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.

Author's Profile

Jan Wolenski
Jagiellonian University

Analytics

Added to PP
2017-03-10

Downloads
8,443 (#603)

6 months
693 (#1,284)

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?