The greatest possible being needn't be anything impossible

2014 ◽  
Vol 51 (4) ◽  
pp. 531-542
Author(s):  
PATRICK TODD

AbstractThere are various argumentative strategies for advancing the claim that God does not exist. One such strategy is this. First, one notes that God is meant to have a certain divine attribute (such as omniscience). One then argues that having the relevant attribute is impossible. One concludes that God doesn't exist. For instance, Dennis Whitcomb's recent paper, ‘Grounding and omniscience’, proceeds in exactly this way. As Whitcomb says, ‘I'm going to argue that omniscience is impossible and that therefore there is no God.’ This is not, I hope to show, a very promising way to start a paper. If having a given property is impossible, the greatest possible being need not have that property. Accordingly, the argumentative strategy in question is doomed to failure. The upshot of this article is a quite general one concerning how arguments against the existence of God in fact must proceed.

Author(s):  
Tyron Goldschmidt

This chapter considers Plantinga’s argument from numbers for the existence of God. Plantinga sees divine psychologism as having advantages over both human psychologism and Platonism. The chapter begins with Plantinga’s description of the argument, including the relation of numbers to any divine attribute. It then argues that human psychologism can be ruled out completely. However, what rules it out might rule out divine psychologism too. It also argues that the main problem with Platonism might also be a problem with divine psychologism. However, it will, at the least, be less of a problem. In any case, there are alternative, possibly viable views about the nature of numbers that have not been touched by Plantinga’s argument. In addition, the chapter touches on the argument from properties, and its relation to the argument from numbers.


2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 193-209
Author(s):  
Maia J. Migdalek ◽  
Celia R. Rosemberg

Recent studies have examined the argumentative strategies used by young children in everyday situations as well as in experimental settings. However, differences in argumentative production as a function of Socio-Economic Status (SES) have been minimally explored. This study aims to analyze eventual differences regarding social group in the use of argumentative strategies and connectors marking causal and adversative relationships within these strategies. The corpus is 615 disputes occurred during play situations in the homes of 39 4-year old children living in Buenos Aires, Argentina: 453 of mid SES children and 162 of low SES. Argumentative strategies were codified using a system of inductively derived categories: a) the reiteration of the child’s point of view; b) the narration of previous experiences; c) the anticipation of courses of action; d) generalization; e) the description of the characteristics of an object, event or internal state; f) referencing authority; g) the mitigation of the point of view; h) providing an alternative proposal. Results show that in both social groups the use of an argumentative strategy to sustain the point of view predominates over merely stating the point of view. Additionally, we found significant differences in a) Reiteration strategy, with the low SES group showing a greater use of this strategy and b) Generalization and Description strategies, with the mid SES children employing these ones more frequently. Regarding the connectors, significant differences were only detected in the use of consecutive and adversative markers. The mid SES group showed a greater use of these particular connectors.


2019 ◽  
Vol 39 (4) ◽  
pp. 301-328 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ton Van Haaften

The extended pragma-dialectical argumentation theory assumes that people engaged in argumentative discourse manoeuvre strategically. In argumentative reality, the strategic manoeuvring is often carried out according to an argumentative strategy. Language users make an effort to present their strategic manoeuvres in a specific way and the analysis of the stylistic choices in actual argumentative discourse is the most important basis for identification and analysis of argumentative strategies. In this article, it is shown what requirements must be satisfied by a systematic stylistic analysis of argumentative discourse, and the results of such an analysis are illustrated by means of a case study.


Author(s):  
Jeff Speaks

Often the claim that God is the greatest possible being is claimed to capture the concept of God. This view can come to the aid of the theist in responding to arguments against the existence of God. This chapter argues that this argumentative strategy, which is here called ‘the perfect being defense,’ is a failure. The moral is that the concept of God is not captured by the concept of a greatest possible (or conceivable) being. Debates between theists and atheists need to be reconceived accordingly.


2008 ◽  
pp. 110-134
Author(s):  
Pavlo Yuriyovych Pavlenko

The cornerstone of any religion is its anthropological concept, which seeks to determine the essential orientations of man, to outline the ideological framework of its existence, to represent the idea of ​​its essence, purpose in earthly life. The main task of the religious system is the act of involving and subordinating man to the spiritual divine realm as the realm of the transcendental existence of God. Belief in the real presence of the latter implies a new understanding of oneself, which ultimately leads the religious individual to the desire to be involved in this transcendental existence, to have intimate relations with him, to have a consciousness inherent in God. Note that in this context, all human being is interpreted as a certain arena for this realization. Therefore, the religious life of the individual acquires the status of religious activity.


2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 105-131
Author(s):  
Bruce Russell

I begin by distinguishing four different versions of the argument from evil that start from four different moral premises that in various ways link the existence of God to the absence of suffering. The version of the argument from evil that I defend starts from the premise that if God exists, he would not allow excessive, unnecessary suffering. The argument continues by denying the consequent of this conditional to conclude that God does not exist. I defend the argument against Skeptical Theists who say we are in no position to judge that there is excessive, unnecessary suffering by arguing that this defense has absurd consequences. It allows Young Earthers to construct a parallel argument that concludes that we are in no position to judge that God did not create the earth recently. In the last section I consider whether theists can turn the argument from evil on its head by arguing that God exists. I first criticize Alvin Plantinga’s theory of warrant that one might try to use to argue for God’s existence. I then criticize Richard Swinburne’s Bayesian argument to the same conclusion. I conclude that my version of the argument from evil is a strong argument against the existence of God and that several important responses to it do not defeat it.


2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 22
Author(s):  
Barbara Botter

L’obbiettivo del presente articolo è di circoscrivere ed approfondire lo studio di alcune strategie persuasive messe in atto da Socrate nel Gorgia platonico. Analizzando dapprima lo stile letterario, quindi gli scambi di battute fra gli interlocutori, ci proponiamo di evidenziare le ragioni della scelta platonica per lo stile drammatico, le strategie argomentative messe in atto dai protagonisti e le finalità in vista delle quali Platone crea un Socrate a due volti, un Socrate filosofo e un Socrate erista. In vista di ciò divideremo il testo in due sezioni principali: dapprima forniremo la cornice letteraria nella quale si inserisce il dialogo Gorgia; quindi esamineremo le strategie discorsive usate dagli interlocutori per difendere le rispettive tesi e giustificheremo la ragioni per cui la cura del discorso è importante per garantire un regime politico corretto. The aim of this article is to investigate the persuasive strategies produced by Socrates in the Plato’s Gorgias. First we’ll analyse the literary style, then the dialectical practices between Socrates and the other people, specifically Polo and Calicles. Our aim is to highlight the reasons why Plato choices a dramatic style in Gorgias; the argumentative strategies put in place by the protagonist and the other dialogue’s figures; and the Plato’s aims to create a Socrates with two faces: a Socrates philosopher and an eristic Socrates. With these aspects in mind, this paper has two main objectives. First we will consider the literary framework in which the dialogue Gorgias is put; then we’ll look at the discursive strategies used by the interlocutors to defend their arguments and justify why the care of speech is important to safeguard an appropriate politics.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document