‘Something than which nothing greater can be thought’ and Kant's Ens Realissimum
In this paper, I explore Kant's much‐studied critique of the ontological argument, seeking to place Immanuel Kant and Anselm of Canterbury more directly in contact with one another; I do this in two ways. First, I discuss the historical reception of the ontological argument in Kant's eight...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | New Blackfriars 2022-01, Vol.103 (1103), p.77-96 |
---|---|
1. Verfasser: | |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 96 |
---|---|
container_issue | 1103 |
container_start_page | 77 |
container_title | New Blackfriars |
container_volume | 103 |
creator | Jackson, Morgan Keith |
description | In this paper, I explore Kant's much‐studied critique of the ontological argument, seeking to place Immanuel Kant and Anselm of Canterbury more directly in contact with one another; I do this in two ways. First, I discuss the historical reception of the ontological argument in Kant's eighteenth century context. Second, I move the discussion away from the first Critique, and look towards Kant's Pre‐critical discussion of the ontological argument in The Only Possible Argument, where he initially sets out his primary objection. By shifting the focus towards these areas of Kant's thought, I aim to achieve three interrelated goals. First, I show that Kant had a limited knowledge of the history and origins of the ontological argument, which was transmitted to him through Leibniz, Wolff, and Baumgarten, who put a Cartesian spin on it. Second, I provide textual evidence which shows that Kant's objection does not succeed against Anselm's argument. Third, I elucidate that Kant's identification of God as the ens realissimum is compatible with Anselm's identification of God as ‘something than which nothing greater can be thought’. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1111/nbfr.12684 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>wiley_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_crossref_primary_10_1111_nbfr_12684</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>NBFR12684</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c1624-aa92d0f8655a47547d545500f2f9353cec23d9f9dc5e72e238363fc531241af13</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kEtOwzAQhi0EEqGw4QTeISGl-JnHEqoWEBVIpawt17ETo8RBdqqqux6jXK8nISWsmc1o_vlmFh8A1xiNcV93bmX8GJMkYycgwinDMUGIn4IIIZLFjGT5ObgI4bMfkxThCCwPu_172-iusq6EXSUd3FRWVdC1Q1R6LTvtoeo3K90T7bqsusPuG0pXwBfpupsApy7AhZa1DcE26-YSnBlZB33110fgYzZdTp7i-dvj8-R-HiucEBZLmZMCmSzhXLKUs7TgjHOEDDE55VRpRWiRm7xQXKdEE5rRhBrFKSYMS4PpCNwOf5VvQ_DaiC9vG-m3AiNx9CGOPsSvjx7GA7yxtd7-Q4rXh9liuPkBcFBkRQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>‘Something than which nothing greater can be thought’ and Kant's Ens Realissimum</title><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><source>Cambridge University Press Journals Complete</source><creator>Jackson, Morgan Keith</creator><creatorcontrib>Jackson, Morgan Keith</creatorcontrib><description>In this paper, I explore Kant's much‐studied critique of the ontological argument, seeking to place Immanuel Kant and Anselm of Canterbury more directly in contact with one another; I do this in two ways. First, I discuss the historical reception of the ontological argument in Kant's eighteenth century context. Second, I move the discussion away from the first Critique, and look towards Kant's Pre‐critical discussion of the ontological argument in The Only Possible Argument, where he initially sets out his primary objection. By shifting the focus towards these areas of Kant's thought, I aim to achieve three interrelated goals. First, I show that Kant had a limited knowledge of the history and origins of the ontological argument, which was transmitted to him through Leibniz, Wolff, and Baumgarten, who put a Cartesian spin on it. Second, I provide textual evidence which shows that Kant's objection does not succeed against Anselm's argument. Third, I elucidate that Kant's identification of God as the ens realissimum is compatible with Anselm's identification of God as ‘something than which nothing greater can be thought’.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0028-4289</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1741-2005</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/nbfr.12684</identifier><language>eng</language><subject>Anselm ; Ens Realissimum ; Kant ; Ontological argument ; Proslogion</subject><ispartof>New Blackfriars, 2022-01, Vol.103 (1103), p.77-96</ispartof><rights>2021 Provincial Council of the English Province of the Order of Preachers</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c1624-aa92d0f8655a47547d545500f2f9353cec23d9f9dc5e72e238363fc531241af13</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-2277-6320</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2Fnbfr.12684$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Fnbfr.12684$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,1411,27901,27902,45550,45551</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Jackson, Morgan Keith</creatorcontrib><title>‘Something than which nothing greater can be thought’ and Kant's Ens Realissimum</title><title>New Blackfriars</title><description>In this paper, I explore Kant's much‐studied critique of the ontological argument, seeking to place Immanuel Kant and Anselm of Canterbury more directly in contact with one another; I do this in two ways. First, I discuss the historical reception of the ontological argument in Kant's eighteenth century context. Second, I move the discussion away from the first Critique, and look towards Kant's Pre‐critical discussion of the ontological argument in The Only Possible Argument, where he initially sets out his primary objection. By shifting the focus towards these areas of Kant's thought, I aim to achieve three interrelated goals. First, I show that Kant had a limited knowledge of the history and origins of the ontological argument, which was transmitted to him through Leibniz, Wolff, and Baumgarten, who put a Cartesian spin on it. Second, I provide textual evidence which shows that Kant's objection does not succeed against Anselm's argument. Third, I elucidate that Kant's identification of God as the ens realissimum is compatible with Anselm's identification of God as ‘something than which nothing greater can be thought’.</description><subject>Anselm</subject><subject>Ens Realissimum</subject><subject>Kant</subject><subject>Ontological argument</subject><subject>Proslogion</subject><issn>0028-4289</issn><issn>1741-2005</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kEtOwzAQhi0EEqGw4QTeISGl-JnHEqoWEBVIpawt17ETo8RBdqqqux6jXK8nISWsmc1o_vlmFh8A1xiNcV93bmX8GJMkYycgwinDMUGIn4IIIZLFjGT5ObgI4bMfkxThCCwPu_172-iusq6EXSUd3FRWVdC1Q1R6LTvtoeo3K90T7bqsusPuG0pXwBfpupsApy7AhZa1DcE26-YSnBlZB33110fgYzZdTp7i-dvj8-R-HiucEBZLmZMCmSzhXLKUs7TgjHOEDDE55VRpRWiRm7xQXKdEE5rRhBrFKSYMS4PpCNwOf5VvQ_DaiC9vG-m3AiNx9CGOPsSvjx7GA7yxtd7-Q4rXh9liuPkBcFBkRQ</recordid><startdate>202201</startdate><enddate>202201</enddate><creator>Jackson, Morgan Keith</creator><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2277-6320</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202201</creationdate><title>‘Something than which nothing greater can be thought’ and Kant's Ens Realissimum</title><author>Jackson, Morgan Keith</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c1624-aa92d0f8655a47547d545500f2f9353cec23d9f9dc5e72e238363fc531241af13</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>Anselm</topic><topic>Ens Realissimum</topic><topic>Kant</topic><topic>Ontological argument</topic><topic>Proslogion</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Jackson, Morgan Keith</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><jtitle>New Blackfriars</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Jackson, Morgan Keith</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>‘Something than which nothing greater can be thought’ and Kant's Ens Realissimum</atitle><jtitle>New Blackfriars</jtitle><date>2022-01</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>103</volume><issue>1103</issue><spage>77</spage><epage>96</epage><pages>77-96</pages><issn>0028-4289</issn><eissn>1741-2005</eissn><abstract>In this paper, I explore Kant's much‐studied critique of the ontological argument, seeking to place Immanuel Kant and Anselm of Canterbury more directly in contact with one another; I do this in two ways. First, I discuss the historical reception of the ontological argument in Kant's eighteenth century context. Second, I move the discussion away from the first Critique, and look towards Kant's Pre‐critical discussion of the ontological argument in The Only Possible Argument, where he initially sets out his primary objection. By shifting the focus towards these areas of Kant's thought, I aim to achieve three interrelated goals. First, I show that Kant had a limited knowledge of the history and origins of the ontological argument, which was transmitted to him through Leibniz, Wolff, and Baumgarten, who put a Cartesian spin on it. Second, I provide textual evidence which shows that Kant's objection does not succeed against Anselm's argument. Third, I elucidate that Kant's identification of God as the ens realissimum is compatible with Anselm's identification of God as ‘something than which nothing greater can be thought’.</abstract><doi>10.1111/nbfr.12684</doi><tpages>20</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2277-6320</orcidid></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0028-4289 |
ispartof | New Blackfriars, 2022-01, Vol.103 (1103), p.77-96 |
issn | 0028-4289 1741-2005 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_crossref_primary_10_1111_nbfr_12684 |
source | Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete; Cambridge University Press Journals Complete |
subjects | Anselm Ens Realissimum Kant Ontological argument Proslogion |
title | ‘Something than which nothing greater can be thought’ and Kant's Ens Realissimum |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-03T20%3A22%3A10IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-wiley_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=%E2%80%98Something%20than%20which%20nothing%20greater%20can%20be%20thought%E2%80%99%20and%20Kant's%20Ens%20Realissimum&rft.jtitle=New%20Blackfriars&rft.au=Jackson,%20Morgan%20Keith&rft.date=2022-01&rft.volume=103&rft.issue=1103&rft.spage=77&rft.epage=96&rft.pages=77-96&rft.issn=0028-4289&rft.eissn=1741-2005&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/nbfr.12684&rft_dat=%3Cwiley_cross%3ENBFR12684%3C/wiley_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |