基于全知的可能性和/或对强烈不可知论的反驳，对上帝存在的模态认知论证

IF 0.5 2区哲学 0 RELIGION RELIGIOUS STUDIES Pub Date : 2023-06-29 DOI:10.1017/s0034412523000537

F. Bertato

{"title":"基于全知的可能性和/或对强烈不可知论的反驳，对上帝存在的模态认知论证","authors":"F. Bertato","doi":"10.1017/s0034412523000537","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n In this article I present some modal-epistemic arguments for the existence of God, based on the possibility of omniscience. For this, I provide modal formal systems that allow obtaining the existence of God as a theorem. Moreover, based on what I assume as reasonable premises, they show that the strong agnostic position is contradictory, since it allows the conclusion both that God exists and that God does not exist.","PeriodicalId":45888,"journal":{"name":"RELIGIOUS STUDIES","volume":"27 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Modal-epistemic arguments for the existence of God based on the possibility of the omniscience and/or refutation of the strong agnosticism\",\"authors\":\"F. Bertato\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/s0034412523000537\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n In this article I present some modal-epistemic arguments for the existence of God, based on the possibility of omniscience. For this, I provide modal formal systems that allow obtaining the existence of God as a theorem. Moreover, based on what I assume as reasonable premises, they show that the strong agnostic position is contradictory, since it allows the conclusion both that God exists and that God does not exist.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45888,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"RELIGIOUS STUDIES\",\"volume\":\"27 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"RELIGIOUS STUDIES\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1095\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/s0034412523000537\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"RELIGION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"RELIGIOUS STUDIES","FirstCategoryId":"1095","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s0034412523000537","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

在这篇文章中，我提出了一些基于全知可能性的关于上帝存在的模态-认识论论证。为此，我提供了模态形式系统，允许以定理的形式获得上帝的存在。此外，基于我所假定的合理前提，他们表明强烈的不可知论立场是矛盾的，因为它允许上帝存在和上帝不存在的结论。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文

微信好友朋友圈 QQ好友复制链接

本刊更多论文

Modal-epistemic arguments for the existence of God based on the possibility of the omniscience and/or refutation of the strong agnosticism

In this article I present some modal-epistemic arguments for the existence of God, based on the possibility of omniscience. For this, I provide modal formal systems that allow obtaining the existence of God as a theorem. Moreover, based on what I assume as reasonable premises, they show that the strong agnostic position is contradictory, since it allows the conclusion both that God exists and that God does not exist.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

RELIGIOUS STUDIES RELIGION-

CiteScore

1.20

自引率

33.30%

发文量

期刊介绍： Religious Studies is an international journal devoted to the problems of the philosophy of religion as they arise out of classical and contemporary discussions and from varied religious traditions. More than 25 articles are published each year, and the journal also contains an extensive book review section.

期刊最新文献

One goodness, many goodnesses, and the Divine Ideas Imitation Theory Divine contradiction: fascinating but unpersuasive Divine Contradiction: some snippets Divine Contradiction: replies to critics Divine command theory and the (supposed) incoherence of self-commanding