‘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...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:New Blackfriars 2022-01, Vol.103 (1103), p.77-96
1. Verfasser: Jackson, Morgan Keith
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