Uma avaliação do argumento ontológico modal de Plantinga

Domingos Faria
{"title":"Uma avaliação do argumento ontológico modal de Plantinga","authors":"Domingos Faria","doi":"10.1515/kjps-2016-0004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract My aim in this paper is to critically assess Plantinga’s modal ontological argument for existence of God, such as it is presented in the book “The Nature of Necessity” (1974). Plantinga tries to show that this argument is (i) valid and (ii) it is rational to believe in his main premise, namely “there is a possible world in which maximal greatness is instantiated”. On the one hand, I want to show that this argument is logically valid in both systems B and S5 of modal logic. On the other hand, I think that this argument is not a good argument to show that God exists or that it is rational to believe in God.","PeriodicalId":52005,"journal":{"name":"Kairos-Journal of Philosophy & Science","volume":"3 1","pages":"71 - 84"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Kairos-Journal of Philosophy & Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/kjps-2016-0004","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract My aim in this paper is to critically assess Plantinga’s modal ontological argument for existence of God, such as it is presented in the book “The Nature of Necessity” (1974). Plantinga tries to show that this argument is (i) valid and (ii) it is rational to believe in his main premise, namely “there is a possible world in which maximal greatness is instantiated”. On the one hand, I want to show that this argument is logically valid in both systems B and S5 of modal logic. On the other hand, I think that this argument is not a good argument to show that God exists or that it is rational to believe in God.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
对Plantinga的模态本体论论证的评价
我在这篇论文中的目的是批判性地评估普兰廷加关于上帝存在的模态本体论论证,就像它在《必然性的本质》(1974)一书中提出的那样。Plantinga试图证明这个论证是(i)有效的,(ii)相信他的主要前提是合理的,即“存在一个可能的世界,在这个世界中最大的伟大是实例化的”。一方面,我想证明这个论证在模态逻辑的系统B和系统S5中都是逻辑有效的。另一方面,我认为这个论点不能很好地证明上帝存在,也不能证明相信上帝是理性的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
20 weeks
期刊最新文献
A parrésia em Foucault - tecimentos Lying, computers and self-awareness Equações Como Ícones (Seguidos Das Suas Peircianas “Verdades Insuspeitadas”) On how statistics is used and abused to find truth in Science Jean-Yves Mercury, Chemins Avec et Autour de Merleau-Ponty (Paris, L’Harmattan, 2019)
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1