- 期刊
為何上帝存在的模態認知論證是錯的？
Why Is the Modal-Epistemic Argument for the Existence of God Flawed?
並列摘要
Emanuel Rutten proposes a novel argument, which is called a modal-epistemic argument, for the existence of God. This argument has two premises: 1. all possible truths are knowable; and 2. it is not knowable that God does not exit. Stefan Wintein evaluates the argument by Rutten and refutes both of his premises. This article is a response to both Rutten and Wintein. It argues that the objections by Wintein are not convincing. It argues further that Rutten fails in providing a justification for the second premise of his argument. Moreover, this article shows that the modal-epistemic argument is not immune to the parity objection and therefore faces the same problem that traditional modal arguments do.
延伸閱讀
- 紀建勛（2022）。明末上帝存在的認識論之爭及儒耶對話的一種可能。哲學與文化，49(3)，151-164。https://www.airitilibrary.com/Article/Detail?DocID=10158383-202203-202203170006-202203170006-151-164
- 紀建勛（2014）。漢語神學的濫觴：利瑪竇「帝天說」與上帝存在的證明。漢語基督教學術論評，(17)，47-73。https://www.airitilibrary.com/Article/Detail?DocID=19902670-201406-201606170030-201606170030-47-73
- 劉愛民（2014）。黑格爾論上帝存在的證明。中央大學人文學報，(57)，109-151。https://www.airitilibrary.com/Article/Detail?DocID=19939167-201404-201412220010-201412220010-109-151
- Slote, M. (2014). Sentimentalist Epistemology. 哲學與文化, 41(3), 17-45. https://www.airitilibrary.com/Article/Detail?DocID=10158383-201403-201404230034-201404230034-17-45
- 陳波（2023）。Logical Exceptionalism and Its Predicaments。哲學與文化，50(2)，3-22。https://www.airitilibrary.com/Article/Detail?DocID=10158383-N202302240005-00002