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). St.
Thomas Aquinas, while proposing five proofs of God's existence in his Summa Theologica, objected to Anselm's argument. He suggested that people cannot know the nature of God and, therefore, cannot conceive of God in the way Anselm proposed. [72] The ontological argument would be meaningful only to someone who understands the essence of God ...
Gödel believed that God was personal, [47] and called his philosophy "rationalistic, idealistic, optimistic, and theological". [48] He formulated a formal proof for the existence of God known as Gödel's ontological proof.
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. [2]
Other arguments for the existence of God have been proposed by St. Anselm, who formulated the first ontological argument; Thomas Aquinas, who presented his own version of the cosmological argument (the first way); René Descartes, who said that the existence of a benevolent God is logically necessary for the evidence of the senses to be meaningful.
In the context of philosophy, the term is commonly used in critiques of ontological arguments for the existence of God and the principle of divine simplicity. [1] [3] For example, Gödel's ontological proof contains as a theorem, which combined with the axioms of system S5 leads to modal collapse. [4]
Gödel's ontological proof This page was last edited on 22 February 2022, at 17:49 (UTC). Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution ...
In which case it is no longer anything like Godel's proof, and no longer carries even the level of certainty Godel's proof carries, because there is no evidence that the property "exists" is necessary for a thing that is incompatible with God to possess, while in Godel's proof, if you accept that "exists" is a positive property and that God ...