Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-dtkg6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-09T15:29:42.894Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The ontological argument and the motivational centres of lives

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 February 2010

ALEXANDER R. PRUSS
ALEXANDER R. PRUSS*
Affiliation:
Department of Philosophy, Baylor University, One Bear Place #97273, Waco, TX 76798-7273
*
e-mail: Alexander_Pruss@baylor.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Assuming S5, the main controversial premise in modal ontological arguments is the possibility premise, such as that possibly a maximally great being exists. I shall offer a new way of arguing that the possibility premise is probably true.

Type
Articles
Information
Religious Studies , Volume 46 , Issue 2 , June 2010 , pp. 233 - 249
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Arnold, M. (1962) Lectures and Essays in Criticism (Ann Arbor MI: University of Michigan Press).Google Scholar
Chalmers, D. (2006) ‘Two-dimensional semantics’, in Lepore, E. and Smith, B.) Oxford Handbook of the Philosophy of Language (Oxford: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
Plantinga, A. (1978) The Nature of Necessity (Oxford: Clarendon Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pruss, A.R. (2001) ‘Samkara's principle and two ontomystical arguments’, International Journal for Philosophy of Religion, 49, 111–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Russell, B. (1917) ‘A free man's worship’, in idem Mysticism and Logic (London: Allen & Unwin).Google Scholar
van Inwagen, P. (1994) ‘Quam dilecta’, in Morris, T.) God and the Philosophers (New York NY: Oxford University Press), 31–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar