On behalf of the devil: A parody of Anselm revisited

Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 100 (1):93–113 (2000)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This paper treats a question which first arose in these Proceedings: Can Anselm's ontological argument be inverted so as to yield parallel proofs for the existence (or non-existence) of a least (or worst) conceivable being? Such 'devil parodies' strike some commentators as innocuous curiosities, or redundant challenges which are no more troubling than other parodies found in the literature (e.g., Gaunilo's Island). I take issue with both of these allegations; devil parodies, I argue, have the potential to pose substantive, and novel, challenges to Anselm's ontological argument

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,386

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

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
131 (#136,623)

6 months
20 (#126,159)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

Millican on the Ontological Argument.Yujin Nagasawa - 2007 - Mind 116 (464):1027-1040.

Add more citations

References found in this work

The ontological argument revisited.William P. Alston - 1960 - Philosophical Review 69 (4):452-474.
XV.—The Ontological Argument for the Existence of God.Albert A. Cock - 1918 - Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 18 (1):363-384.
The Ontological Disproof of the Devil.C. K. Grant - 1956 - Analysis 17 (3):71 - 72.
The ontological proof of the devil.Robert J. Richman - 1958 - Philosophical Studies 9 (4):63 - 64.
Items 1 -122.[author unknown] - 1936 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 1 (4):123-155.

View all 6 references / Add more references