The ontological argument and Russell’s antinomy
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.12775/LLP.2009.015Słowa kluczowe
ontological argument, Russell’s paradox, St. AnselmAbstrakt
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.Bibliografia
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.
Pobrania
Opublikowane
30.03.2010
Jak cytować
1.
UCKELMAN, Sara L. The ontological argument and Russell’s antinomy. Logic and Logical Philosophy [online]. 30 marzec 2010, T. 18, nr 3-4, s. 309–312. [udostępniono 5.7.2025]. DOI 10.12775/LLP.2009.015.
Numer
Dział
Artykuły
Statystyki
Liczba wyświetleń i pobrań: 703
Liczba cytowań: 0