Kant and the ‘antinomy’ of the actually existing thing

Autores
Ferreiro, Héctor Alberto
Año de publicación
2021
Idioma
inglés
Tipo de recurso
parte de libro
Estado
versión publicada
Descripción
Fil: Ferreiro, Héctor Alberto. Investigador independiente
Anselm′s proof of the existence of a being that encompasses all determinations was accepted by many philosophers in the Middle Ages and the Modern Era; among them Duns Scotus, Descartes, Malebranche, Leibniz, Wolff, and Baumgarten. But from the very beginning the “ontological argument”, as it was called by Kant, also faced fierce resistance: starting with Gaunilo the list of critics of Anselm’s proof includes Thomas Aquinas, William of Ockham, Crusius, Hume and Kant, among many others. As a rule, the criticism of these authors was not aimed at the demonstrability of God’s existence – Hume and Kant were exceptions in this respect–, but rather against the particular line of argumentation of the ontological proof. Aquinas′ critique epitomizes this position, since he criticizes Anselm’s argument, while offering at the same time an alternative proof to demonstrate the existence of God that also relies on existence as such – although not, as it was the case in Anselm’s argument, on the existence of the content of a merely mental representation, but on the existence of transitory beings given to perception. The tertia via – known later as argumentum a contingentia mundi or, since Kant, as “cosmological argument” – can be traced back to Plato (Phaedo, 72 c–e; Phaedrus, 245 d–e) and Aristotle (De caelo I 12, 283 a 30, sqq.); however, it is in the context of Scholastic philosophy where that proof was developed in a more consistent way, since the contingency of each existing being was extended then to the totality of existing things by the dogma of the creatio ex nihilo. Throughout the history of philosophy the cosmological argument has had at least as many supporters as the ontological argument; thus, it has also been formulated in many different ways. In a nutshell, the line of reasoning of the cosmological argument is that all things that exist in the universe begin to exist and eventually cease to exist; thus, if contingent things have the possibility both to exist and not to exist, there must be a being that exists necessarily and can for that very reason explain that what does not exist necessarily receives its existence from what exists by itself...
Fuente
Himmelmann, B., Serck-Hanssen, C. The Court of Reason : proceedings of the 13th International Kant Congress. Boston: De Gruyter, 2021.
Materia
Kant, Immanuel, 1724-1804
FILOSOFIA ALEMANA
EXISTENCIA
RAZON
IDEALISMO
Nivel de accesibilidad
acceso abierto
Condiciones de uso
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
Repositorio
Repositorio Institucional (UCA)
Institución
Pontificia Universidad Católica Argentina
OAI Identificador
oai:ucacris:123456789/13911

id RIUCA_10b89671c18527519222873271b2f6db
oai_identifier_str oai:ucacris:123456789/13911
network_acronym_str RIUCA
repository_id_str 2585
network_name_str Repositorio Institucional (UCA)
spelling Kant and the ‘antinomy’ of the actually existing thingFerreiro, Héctor AlbertoKant, Immanuel, 1724-1804FILOSOFIA ALEMANAEXISTENCIARAZONIDEALISMOFil: Ferreiro, Héctor Alberto. Investigador independienteAnselm′s proof of the existence of a being that encompasses all determinations was accepted by many philosophers in the Middle Ages and the Modern Era; among them Duns Scotus, Descartes, Malebranche, Leibniz, Wolff, and Baumgarten. But from the very beginning the “ontological argument”, as it was called by Kant, also faced fierce resistance: starting with Gaunilo the list of critics of Anselm’s proof includes Thomas Aquinas, William of Ockham, Crusius, Hume and Kant, among many others. As a rule, the criticism of these authors was not aimed at the demonstrability of God’s existence – Hume and Kant were exceptions in this respect–, but rather against the particular line of argumentation of the ontological proof. Aquinas′ critique epitomizes this position, since he criticizes Anselm’s argument, while offering at the same time an alternative proof to demonstrate the existence of God that also relies on existence as such – although not, as it was the case in Anselm’s argument, on the existence of the content of a merely mental representation, but on the existence of transitory beings given to perception. The tertia via – known later as argumentum a contingentia mundi or, since Kant, as “cosmological argument” – can be traced back to Plato (Phaedo, 72 c–e; Phaedrus, 245 d–e) and Aristotle (De caelo I 12, 283 a 30, sqq.); however, it is in the context of Scholastic philosophy where that proof was developed in a more consistent way, since the contingency of each existing being was extended then to the totality of existing things by the dogma of the creatio ex nihilo. Throughout the history of philosophy the cosmological argument has had at least as many supporters as the ontological argument; thus, it has also been formulated in many different ways. In a nutshell, the line of reasoning of the cosmological argument is that all things that exist in the universe begin to exist and eventually cease to exist; thus, if contingent things have the possibility both to exist and not to exist, there must be a being that exists necessarily and can for that very reason explain that what does not exist necessarily receives its existence from what exists by itself...De Gruyter2021info:eu-repo/semantics/bookPartinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionhttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_3248info:ar-repo/semantics/parteDeLibroapplication/pdfhttps://repositorio.uca.edu.ar/handle/123456789/13911978311070070110.1515/9783110701357-043Ferreiro, H. A. Kant and the ‘antinomy’ of the actually existing thing [en línea]. En: Himmelmann, B., Serck-Hanssen, C. The Court of Reason : proceedings of the 13th International Kant Congress. Boston: De Gruyter, 2021. doi: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110701357-043. Disponible en: https://repositorio.uca.edu.ar/handle/123456789/13911Himmelmann, B., Serck-Hanssen, C. The Court of Reason : proceedings of the 13th International Kant Congress. Boston: De Gruyter, 2021.reponame:Repositorio Institucional (UCA)instname:Pontificia Universidad Católica Argentinaenginfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccesshttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/2025-07-03T10:58:33Zoai:ucacris:123456789/13911instacron:UCAInstitucionalhttps://repositorio.uca.edu.ar/Universidad privadaNo correspondehttps://repositorio.uca.edu.ar/oaiclaudia_fernandez@uca.edu.arArgentinaNo correspondeNo correspondeNo correspondeopendoar:25852025-07-03 10:58:33.672Repositorio Institucional (UCA) - Pontificia Universidad Católica Argentinafalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Kant and the ‘antinomy’ of the actually existing thing
title Kant and the ‘antinomy’ of the actually existing thing
spellingShingle Kant and the ‘antinomy’ of the actually existing thing
Ferreiro, Héctor Alberto
Kant, Immanuel, 1724-1804
FILOSOFIA ALEMANA
EXISTENCIA
RAZON
IDEALISMO
title_short Kant and the ‘antinomy’ of the actually existing thing
title_full Kant and the ‘antinomy’ of the actually existing thing
title_fullStr Kant and the ‘antinomy’ of the actually existing thing
title_full_unstemmed Kant and the ‘antinomy’ of the actually existing thing
title_sort Kant and the ‘antinomy’ of the actually existing thing
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv Ferreiro, Héctor Alberto
author Ferreiro, Héctor Alberto
author_facet Ferreiro, Héctor Alberto
author_role author
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv Kant, Immanuel, 1724-1804
FILOSOFIA ALEMANA
EXISTENCIA
RAZON
IDEALISMO
topic Kant, Immanuel, 1724-1804
FILOSOFIA ALEMANA
EXISTENCIA
RAZON
IDEALISMO
dc.description.none.fl_txt_mv Fil: Ferreiro, Héctor Alberto. Investigador independiente
Anselm′s proof of the existence of a being that encompasses all determinations was accepted by many philosophers in the Middle Ages and the Modern Era; among them Duns Scotus, Descartes, Malebranche, Leibniz, Wolff, and Baumgarten. But from the very beginning the “ontological argument”, as it was called by Kant, also faced fierce resistance: starting with Gaunilo the list of critics of Anselm’s proof includes Thomas Aquinas, William of Ockham, Crusius, Hume and Kant, among many others. As a rule, the criticism of these authors was not aimed at the demonstrability of God’s existence – Hume and Kant were exceptions in this respect–, but rather against the particular line of argumentation of the ontological proof. Aquinas′ critique epitomizes this position, since he criticizes Anselm’s argument, while offering at the same time an alternative proof to demonstrate the existence of God that also relies on existence as such – although not, as it was the case in Anselm’s argument, on the existence of the content of a merely mental representation, but on the existence of transitory beings given to perception. The tertia via – known later as argumentum a contingentia mundi or, since Kant, as “cosmological argument” – can be traced back to Plato (Phaedo, 72 c–e; Phaedrus, 245 d–e) and Aristotle (De caelo I 12, 283 a 30, sqq.); however, it is in the context of Scholastic philosophy where that proof was developed in a more consistent way, since the contingency of each existing being was extended then to the totality of existing things by the dogma of the creatio ex nihilo. Throughout the history of philosophy the cosmological argument has had at least as many supporters as the ontological argument; thus, it has also been formulated in many different ways. In a nutshell, the line of reasoning of the cosmological argument is that all things that exist in the universe begin to exist and eventually cease to exist; thus, if contingent things have the possibility both to exist and not to exist, there must be a being that exists necessarily and can for that very reason explain that what does not exist necessarily receives its existence from what exists by itself...
description Fil: Ferreiro, Héctor Alberto. Investigador independiente
publishDate 2021
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2021
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/bookPart
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_3248
info:ar-repo/semantics/parteDeLibro
format bookPart
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv https://repositorio.uca.edu.ar/handle/123456789/13911
9783110700701
10.1515/9783110701357-043
Ferreiro, H. A. Kant and the ‘antinomy’ of the actually existing thing [en línea]. En: Himmelmann, B., Serck-Hanssen, C. The Court of Reason : proceedings of the 13th International Kant Congress. Boston: De Gruyter, 2021. doi: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110701357-043. Disponible en: https://repositorio.uca.edu.ar/handle/123456789/13911
url https://repositorio.uca.edu.ar/handle/123456789/13911
identifier_str_mv 9783110700701
10.1515/9783110701357-043
Ferreiro, H. A. Kant and the ‘antinomy’ of the actually existing thing [en línea]. En: Himmelmann, B., Serck-Hanssen, C. The Court of Reason : proceedings of the 13th International Kant Congress. Boston: De Gruyter, 2021. doi: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110701357-043. Disponible en: https://repositorio.uca.edu.ar/handle/123456789/13911
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv De Gruyter
publisher.none.fl_str_mv De Gruyter
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Himmelmann, B., Serck-Hanssen, C. The Court of Reason : proceedings of the 13th International Kant Congress. Boston: De Gruyter, 2021.
reponame:Repositorio Institucional (UCA)
instname:Pontificia Universidad Católica Argentina
reponame_str Repositorio Institucional (UCA)
collection Repositorio Institucional (UCA)
instname_str Pontificia Universidad Católica Argentina
repository.name.fl_str_mv Repositorio Institucional (UCA) - Pontificia Universidad Católica Argentina
repository.mail.fl_str_mv claudia_fernandez@uca.edu.ar
_version_ 1836638361678249984
score 13.13397