Advertisement

An Even More Leibnizian Version of Gödel’s Ontological Argument

  • Kordula ŚwietorzeckaEmail author
  • Marcin Łyczak
Chapter
  • 6 Downloads
Part of the Sophia Studies in Cross-cultural Philosophy of Traditions and Cultures book series (SCPT, volume 34)

Abstract

We propose a modification of Gödel’s ontological argument for God’s existence from his ‘Ontologischer Beweis’ manuscript (1970). We follow a Leibnizian onto-theology, especially two of Leibniz’s letters from 1676 and 1677, to which Gödel could relate. We consider two differences between Gödel and Leibniz. We argue for the superiority of Leibniz’s ideas, while preserving the main structure of the Gödelian argument. Our first aim is to bring Gödel’s concept of positiveness closer to the idea of a Leibnizian perfectio which should not be understood via negations. Our second goal is to analyze the concept of being necessary in terms of a Leibnizian demonstrability. To this end, we formulate an S4 version of Gödel’s argument without using negative predicate terms. We sketch a model for our theory that allows us to express a few specific properties of the Leibnizian God.

Keywords

Ontological argument Existence of God Gödel Leibniz Logical philosophy Logic applied to ontology 

References

  1. Adams, R. M. 1994. Leibniz. Determinist, Theist, Idealist. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press.Google Scholar
  2. ——. 1995. “Introductory note to *1970”. In K. Gödel, Collected Works, vol. 3, 388–402.Google Scholar
  3. Anderson, C. A. 1990. “Some emendations of Gödel’s ontological proof”. Faith and Philosophy 7: 291–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Christian, C. 1989. “Gödel Version des Ontologischen Gottesbeweises”. Sitzungsberichte der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Abt. II 198: 1–26.Google Scholar
  5. Czermak, J. 2002. “Abriss des ontologischen Argumentes”. In Kurt Gödel. Wahrheit und Beweisbarkeit, vol. II. Kompedium zum Werk, ed. B. Buldt, E. Köhler, M. Stöltzner, P. Weibel, C. Klein, W. DePauli-Schimanowich-Göttig, 309–324. Viena: ÖBV et HPT VerlagsgmbH and Co. KG.Google Scholar
  6. Futch, M. 2008. Leibniz’s Metaphysics of Time and Space. Boston: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Gödel, K. 1970. Ontologischer Beweis. February 10th 1970. Faksimile from Nachlaß reprinted in: Kurt Gödel. Wahrheit und Beweisbarkeit, vol. II. Kompedium zum Werk, ed. B. Buldt, E. Köhler, M. Stöltzner, P. Weibel, C. Klein, W. DePauli-Schimanowich-Göttig, 307–308. Viena: ÖBV et HPT VerlagsgmbH and Co. KG.Google Scholar
  8. ——. 1995. “Texts relating to the ontological proof”. In Kurt Gödel, Collected Works, ed. S. Feferman et al., vol. 3, 429–437. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Hájek, P. 2002. “Der Mathematiker und die Frage der Existenz Gottes (betreffend Gödels ontologischen Beweis)”. In Kurt Gödel. Wahrheit und Beweisbarkeit, vol. II. Kompedium zum Werk, ed. B. Buldt, E. Köhler, M. Stöltzner, P. Weibel, C. Klein, W. DePauli-Schimanowich-Göttig, 325–336. Viena: ÖBV et HPT VerlagsgmbH and Co. KG.Google Scholar
  10. Kovač, S. 2003. “Some weakened Gödelian ontological systems”. Journal of Philosophical Logic 32: 565–588.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. ——. 2017. “The Concept of Possibility in Ontological Proofs”. Presentation of the contributed paper in 2nd World Congress on Logic and Religion University of Warsaw, 18.06–22.06.2017.Google Scholar
  12. Leibniz, G. W. 1987. Sämtliche Schriften und Briefe. Reihe II: Philosophischer Briefwechsel. Band 1. Auflage Darmstadt 1926; zweiter, unveränderter Nachdruck Berlin 1987. (Available on the Internet: http://www.uni-muenster.de/Leibniz/DatenII1/II1_B.pdf 11.09.2017).
  13. ——. 1989. Philosophical Papers and Letters, ed. II, transl. and ed. by L. E. Loemker, The New Synthese Historical Library, vol. 2. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.Google Scholar
  14. Perzanowski, J. 1989. Logiki modalne a filozofia [Modal Logic and Philosophy]. Cracow: Jagiellonian University.Google Scholar
  15. Świetorzecka, K. 2012. “Ontologiczny dowód Gödla z ograniczon ą redukcj ą modalności” [“Gödel’s ontological proof with limited reduction of modalities”]. Przegl ąd Filozoficzny Nowa Seria 3 (83): 21–34.Google Scholar
  16. Świetorzecka, K. ed., 2016. Gödel’s Ontological Argument. History, Modifications, and Controversies. Warszawa: Semper.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of PhilosophyCardinal Stefan Wyszyński University in WarsawWarsawPoland

Personalised recommendations