The ontological argument and Russell’s antinomy

Sara L. Uckelman

doi:10.12775/LLP.2009.015

Authors

Sara L. Uckelman Universiteit van Amsterdam

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.12775/LLP.2009.015

Keywords

ontological argument, Russell’s paradox, St. Anselm

Abstract

In this short note we respond to the claim made by Christopher Viger in [4] that Anselm’s so-called ontological argument falls prey to Russell’s paradox. We show that Viger’s argument is based on a flawed premise and hence does not in fact demonstrate what he claims it demonstrates.

Author Biography

Sara L. Uckelman, Universiteit van Amsterdam

Institute for Logic, Language, and Computation

References

Neuhaus, F., “On being perfect”, pp. 665–679 in: H. Bohse, K. Dreimann and S. Walter (eds.), Selected papers contributed to the sections of GAP.6, Sixth International Congress of the Society for Analytic Philosophy, Mentis, 2007.

Nowicki, M., “Anselm and Russell”, Logic and Logical Philosophy, 15 (2006): 355–368. DOI: 10.12775/LLP.2006.020

Scheffler, U., “Is it paradoxical to not be greater than God?”, online at http://www.sodass.net/Texte/SchefflerOnViger.pdf, 2002.

Viger, Ch., “St. Anselm’s ontological argument succumbs to Russell’s paradox”, International Journal for Philosophy of Religion, 52, 3 (2002): 123–128.