All this recent talk about hinge propositions, absolute presuppositions, and what not. This seems relevant to them all... — creativesoul
All this recent talk about hinge propositions, absolute presuppositions, and what not. This seems relevant to them all...
— creativesoul
How so? — Posty McPostface
I see the point with existentially idependant things, but care to elaborate? — Posty McPostface
A language-less creature... — creativesoul
...is there a creature which lacks self-expression? — BrianW
All this recent talk about hinge propositions, absolute presuppositions, and what not. This seems relevant to them all...
— creativesoul
How so? — Posty McPostface
ll this recent talk about hinge propositions, absolute presuppositions, and what not. This seems relevant to them all...
— creativesoul
How so? — Posty McPostface
I think beliefs and thoughts are part of self-expression which is inherent in all creatures... — BrianW
p3 That which is existentially dependent upon something else cannot exist prior to it — creativesoul
Kant thought the ontological argument was flawed. Any argument for the existence of God based on the proposition that a God that exists in reality is greater than a God that only in the imagination is based on a confusion.
Predicates
According to Kant the confusion lies in the fact that existence is not a predicate. The predicate is that part of a sentence which is not the subject but which gives information about the subject. A predicate might be a single word like ‘John laughed’ where John is the subject and ‘laughed’ is the predicate. Or a string of words as in the sentence Clare went to school, 'Clare' is the subject and 'went to school' is the predicate. A predicate is a property that a thing can either possess or lack.
Predicates and the Existence of God
When people assert that God exists they are not saying that there is a God and he possesses the property of existence. If that were the case, then when people assert that God does not exist they would be saying that there is a God and he lacks the property of existence, i.e. they would be both affirming and denying God’s existence at the same time. Kant suggests that to say that something exists is to say that the concept of that thing is exemplified in the world. For Kant, existence is not a matter of a thing possessing a property i.e. existence. Existence is a concept corresponding to something in the world.
Kant's objection to the ontological argument is that existence is not a property that can be attributed to beings like we can attribute other properties such as being blue, hard, or round. When we talk about entities existing, Kant contends that we do not mean to add existence as a property to their beings. In other words, the objection seems to be that one cannot go around adding existence as a property to God (or anything else for that matter) in order to define God (or anything else) into existence. Unfortunately, defining my bank account as such a place that contains millions of pounds would not mean that a careful understanding of that definition of ‘my bank account’ would really make it so. In order to see if that definition were true, we would have to go to an ATM and check the balance of my account and see if it is accurate. Similarly, a definition of God must be checked with reality to see if it is correct.
Kant’s Objection to Descartes’ Ontological Argument
Descartes had argued that God had existence in the same way as a triangle has three sides. Kant would agree, if you had a triangle then you did indeed have an object with three sides. But if you do not have the triangle, you have neither its three angles or its three sides. If you accept that there is a God, it is logical to accept also that His existence is necessary. But you don’t have to accept that there is a God.
Hmmmm. P3
p3 That which is existentially dependent upon something else cannot exist prior to it
— creativesoul
What about being and the world?
Being-in-the-world (Dasein (the human being / consciousness)) is existentially dependent upon the world but does it exist prior to it? — Blue Lux
So, does being-in-the-world come into being or stand out prior to the world? — Blue Lux
perfectly intelligible notions - such as "existence" - virtually meaningless. — creativesoul
Isn't it pretty coherent? — Blue Lux
Coherency is not necessary for the presupposition of truth inherently within all thought and belief formation. It is necessary, but insufficient for propositional truth. — creativesoul
and this propositional truth you speak of is purely analytic? — Blue Lux
What is the difference between dependent and existentially dependent? — Blue Lux
What of the proposition "This proposition is not a true proposition"? — Blue Lux
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.