Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Gödel's ontological proof is a formal argument by the mathematician Kurt Gödel (1906–1978) for the existence of God. The argument is in a line of development that goes back to Anselm of Canterbury (1033–1109).
In the early 1970s, Gödel circulated among his friends an elaboration of Leibniz's version of Anselm of Canterbury's ontological proof of God's existence. This is now known as Gödel's ontological proof .
Gödel's ontological proof is a formal argument by the mathematician Kurt Gödel (1906–1978) for the existence of God. The argument is in a line of development that goes back to Anselm of Canterbury (1033–1109). St.
Kurt Gödel created a formalization of Leibniz' version, known as Gödel's ontological proof. [ 1 ] A more recent argument was made by Stephen D. Unwin in 2003, who suggested the use of Bayesian probability to estimate the probability of God's existence.
A more recent ontological argument came from Kurt Gödel, who proposed a formal argument for God's existence. Norman Malcolm also revived the ontological argument in 1960 when he located a second, stronger ontological argument in Anselm's work; Alvin Plantinga challenged this argument and proposed an alternative, based on modal logic.
From Frege to Gödel: A Source Book on Mathematical Logic 1879–1931. Harvard University Press. Bernard Meltzer (1962). On Formally Undecidable Propositions of Principia Mathematica and Related Systems. Translation of the German original by Kurt Gödel, 1931. Basic Books, 1962. Reprinted, Dover, 1992. ISBN 0-486-66980-7. Raymond Smullyan (1966).
Kurt Gödel (1906–1978) was the preeminent mathematical logician of the twentieth century who described his theistic belief as independent of theology. [25] He also composed a formal argument for God's existence known as Gödel's ontological proof.
In his 2nd problem he asked for a proof that "arithmetic" is "consistent". Kurt Gödel would prove in 1931 that, within what he called "P" (nowadays called Peano Arithmetic), "there exist undecidable sentences [propositions]". [4] Because of this, "the consistency of P is unprovable in P, provided P is consistent". [5]