No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Bering and Kant on a Hundred Actual and Possible Thalers
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 19 February 2021
Abstract
This paper has three aims. First, to show Kant’s originality in using the celebrated example of the hundred thalers as a criticism of the ontological proof, despite being inspired by a 1780 booklet by Johann Bering. Second, to assess Bering’s and Kant’s different reasons for supporting the truth meant to be illustrated by the case of the thalers. Third, to point out that the debate on the example demands a discussion of the problem of universals. Indeed, the value and scope of Kant’s (and Bering’s) critique of the ontological argument is decisively determined by his position on this problem.
- Type
- Article
- Information
- Copyright
- © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Kantian Review
References
Anselm, (2000) Complete Philosophical and Theological Treatises. Trans. Hopkins, Jaspers and Richardson, Robert, Minneapolis: Arthur J. Banning Press.Google Scholar
Aristotle (1995) The Complete Works of Aristotle. The Revised Oxford Translation, vol. 1. Ed. Barnes, Jonathan. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Bering, Johann (1780) Prüfung der Beweise für das Dasein Gottes, aus den Begriffen eines höchst vollkommenen und notwendigen Wesen. Gießen: bey Krieger dem ältern.Google Scholar
Descartes, René (1897–1913) Œeuvres de Descartes. Ed. Adam, Charles and PaulTannery. Paris: Cerf.Google Scholar
Descartes, René (1976) Descartes’ Conversation with Burman. Trans. Cottingham, John. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Descartes, René (1984–91) The Philosophical Writings of Descartes. Trans. Stoothoff, Robert, Murdoch, Dugald and Kenny, Anthony. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Di Bella, Stefano (2013) ‘The Myth of the Complete Concept: Completeness and Individuation in Kant and Leibniz’. In Margit, Ruffing, Claudio La, Rocca, Alfredo, Ferrarin and Stefano, Bacin (eds), Kant und die Philosophie in Weltbürgerlicher Absicht: Akten des XI. Kant-Kongresses 2010 (Berlin and New York: De Gruyter), 309–22.Google Scholar
Förster, Eckart (2012) The Twenty-Five Years of Philosophy: A Systematic Reconstruction. Trans. Bowman, Brady. Cambridge, MA, and London: Harvard University Press.10.4159/harvard.9780674064980CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henrich, Dieter (1967) Der ontologische Gottesbeweis: Sein Problem und seine Geschichte in der Neuzeit. 2nd edn. Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck).Google Scholar
Kant, Immanuel (1992–) The Cambridge Edition of the Works of Immanuel Kant. Ed. Guyer, Paul and Allen, W. Wood. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Leibniz, Gottfried Wilhelm (1989) Philosophical Papers and Letters: A Selection. 2nd edn. Trans. and ed. Leroy, E. Loemker. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
MacIver, A. M. (1948) ‘A Note on the Ontological Proof’. Analysis, 8, 48.10.1093/analys/8.3.48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oberst, Michael (2015) ‘Kant on Universals’. History of Philosophy Quarterly, 32, 335–52.Google Scholar
Pasternack, Lawrence (2018) ‘Predication and Modality in Kant’s Critique of the Ontological Argument’. Kant Yearbook, 10, 149–70.10.1515/kantyb-2018-0008CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Plantinga, Alvin (1966) ‘Kant’s Objection to the Ontological Argument’. Journal of Philosophy, 63, 537–46.10.2307/2024217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosenkoetter, Timothy (2010) ‘Absolute Positing, the Frege Anticipation Thesis, and Kant’s Definitions of Judgment’. European Journal of Philosophy, 18, 539–56.Google Scholar
Timossi, Roberto Giovanni (2005) Prove logiche dell’esistenza di Dio da Anselmo d’Aosta a Kurt Gödel: Storia critica dell’argomento ontologico. Milan: Marietti.Google Scholar