Rethinking the Ontological Argument: A Neoclassical Theistic Response

New York: Cambridge University Press (2006)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In recent years, the ontological argument and theistic metaphysics have been criticised by philosophers working in both the analytic and continental traditions. Responses to these criticisms have primarily come from philosophers who make use of the traditional, and problematic, concept of God. In this volume, Daniel A. Dombrowski defends the ontological argument against its contemporary critics, but he does so by using a neoclassical or process concept of God, thereby strengthening the case for a contemporary theistic metaphysics. Relying on the thought of Charles Hartshorne, he builds on Hartshorne's crucial distinction between divine existence and divine actuality, which enables neoclassical defenders of the ontological argument to avoid the familiar criticism that the argument moves illegitimately from an abstract concept to concrete reality. His argument, thus, avoids the problems inherent in the traditional concept of God as static.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

What ontological arguments don’t show.Mylan Engel - 2020 - International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 88 (1):97-114.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
183 (#221,460)

6 months
20 (#560,208)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Daniel Dombrowski
Seattle University

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references