Hume and Kant's criticisms on the ontological argument.

?
  • Created by: Lottie
  • Created on: 15-05-12 11:28

The ontological argument is a priori as it is not based on experience or observation, it is known prior to experience. It is not deductive as it is not probabilistic but gives a certain conclusion. It is also analytical as its truth depends on the meaning of God including something about God’s existence.

Aquinas was a philosopher who criticised this argument. This was not because he did not believe in God, because in fact he was a theist but more…

Comments

BraydenMcKinley

Report

There is a lot of confusion when it comes to metaphysical arguments. Philosophers attempt to explain what makes something ontologically true. However, most people can't agree on what exactly makes something ontologically true. If you need some great plans you can click here to manage your task. Some say it's the idea of something existing in some way. Others say it's the idea of something existing in some way because of something else that exists. And still, others say it's the idea of something existing because of something else that exists.

RuthCallahan

Report

Some say it's the idea of something existing in some way https://chinesebuffetnearmenow.net/ Others say it's the idea of something existing in some way because of something else that exists. And still, others say it's the idea of something existing because of something else that exists.

Post a comment

Similar Philosophy resources:

See all Philosophy resources »See all Hume resources »