Yandell’s “Ontological Argument” for Propositions

From the latest edition of Philosophia Christi, Keith Yandell construes Plantinga’s version of the ontological argument like so:

1. If it is possible that Necessarily, God exists, then Necessarily, God exists.

2. It is possible that Necessarily, God exists.

3. Therefore, Necessarily, God exists.

Likewise with propositions,

1. If it is possible that Necessarily, propositions exist, then Necessarily, propositions exist.

2. It is possible that Necessarily, propositions exist.

3. Therefore, Necessarily, propositions exist.

If theists are inclined to think the first argument is sound, then why not the second? Good question.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s