Save

On Anselm’s Ontological Argument in Proslogion II

In: History of Philosophy & Logical Analysis
Authors:
Paul E. Oppenheimer Philosophy Department, School of Humanities and Sciences, Stanford University 6429 Stanford, CA USA
Philosophy Department, Faculty of Arts, University of Adelaide Adelaide, South Australia Australia

Search for other papers by Paul E. Oppenheimer in
Current site
Brill
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0194-0611
and
Edward N. Zalta Philosophy Department, School of Humanities and Sciences, Stanford University 6429 Stanford, CA USA

Search for other papers by Edward N. Zalta in
Current site
Brill
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6488-3496
Download Citation Get Permissions

Access options

Get access to the full article by using one of the access options below.

Institutional Login

Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials

Login via Institution

Purchase

Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):

Abstract

Formulations of Anselm’s ontological argument have been the subject of a number of recent studies. We examine these studies in light of Anselm’s text and (a) respond to criticisms that have surfaced in reaction to our earlier representations of the argument, (b) identify and defend a more refined representation of Anselm’s argument on the basis of new research, and (c) compare our representation of the argument, which analyzes that than which none greater can be conceived as a definite description, to a representation that analyzes it as an arbitrary name.

Content Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 669 536 19
Full Text Views 11 10 0
PDF Views & Downloads 36 34 1