Anselm’s Other Argument

Released on by Arthur David Smith
preview-18

  • Anselm’s Other Argument Book Detail

  • Author : Arthur David Smith
  • Release Date : 2014-03-10
  • Publisher : Harvard University Press
  • Genre : Biography & Autobiography
  • Pages : 250
  • ISBN 13 : 0674725042
  • File Size : 77,77 MB
DOWNLOAD BOOK

Anselm’s Other Argument by Arthur David Smith PDF Summary

Book Description: Some commentators claim that Anselm’s writings contain a second independent “modal ontological argument” for God’s existence. A. D. Smith contends that although there is a second a priori argument in Anselm, it is not the modal argument. This “other argument” bears a striking resemblance to one that Duns Scotus would later employ.

Disclaimer: www.yourbookbest.com does not own Anselm’s Other Argument books pdf, neither created or scanned. We just provide the link that is already available on the internet, public domain and in Google Drive. If any way it violates the law or has any issues, then kindly mail us via contact us page to request the removal of the link.

Anselm’s Other Argument

Anselm’s Other Argument

File Size : 67,67 MB
Total View : 9961 Views
DOWNLOAD

Some commentators claim that Anselm’s writings contain a second independent “modal ontological argument” for God’s existence. A. D. Smith contends that

Anselm's Argument

Anselm's Argument

File Size : 33,33 MB
Total View : 2459 Views
DOWNLOAD

"Anselm of Canterbury gave the first modal "ontological" argument for God's existence. Yet, despite its distinct originality, philosophers have mostly avoided t

Anselm’s Other Argument

Anselm’s Other Argument

File Size : 22,22 MB
Total View : 3547 Views
DOWNLOAD

Anselm of Canterbury (1033–1109 CE), in his work Proslogion, originated the “ontological argument” for God’s existence, famously arguing that “somethi

Rethinking Anselm's Arguments

Rethinking Anselm's Arguments

File Size : 59,59 MB
Total View : 9535 Views
DOWNLOAD

This book re-examines Anselm’s famous arguments for the existence of God in his Proslogion, and in his Reply. It demonstrates how he validly deduces from plau