The Modal-Epistemic Argument Self-undermined

Stefan Wintein

doi:10.1007/s11841-022-00939-8

The Modal-Epistemic Argument Self-undermined

Stefan Wintein^*

^*Corresponding author for this work

WP ESPhil

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › Academic › peer-review

1 Citation (Scopus)

36 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

In a recent article, Emanuel Rutten defends his Modal-Epistemic Argument (MEA) for the existence of God against various objections that I raised against it. In this article, I observe that Rutten’s defence fails for various reasons. Most notably though, the defence is self-undermining: the very claims that Rutten argues for in his defence yield novel counterexamples to the first premise of the MEA.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	1-15
Number of pages	15
Journal	Sophia
Volume	62
Issue number	1
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1007/s11841-022-00939-8
Publication status	Published - 2 Mar 2023

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© 2023, The Author(s).

Access to Document

10.1007/s11841-022-00939-8Licence: CC BY

The Modal-Epistemic Argument Self-underminedFinal published version, 319 KBLicence: CC BY

Cite this

@article{d46be50a922943259ebb8a286f33e227,

title = "The Modal-Epistemic Argument Self-undermined",

abstract = "In a recent article, Emanuel Rutten defends his Modal-Epistemic Argument (MEA) for the existence of God against various objections that I raised against it. In this article, I observe that Rutten{\textquoteright}s defence fails for various reasons. Most notably though, the defence is self-undermining: the very claims that Rutten argues for in his defence yield novel counterexamples to the first premise of the MEA.",

author = "Stefan Wintein",

note = "Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2023, The Author(s).",

year = "2023",

month = mar,

day = "2",

doi = "10.1007/s11841-022-00939-8",

language = "English",

volume = "62",

pages = "1--15",

journal = "Sophia",

issn = "0038-1527",

publisher = "Springer Netherlands",

number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The Modal-Epistemic Argument Self-undermined

AU - Wintein, Stefan

PY - 2023/3/2

Y1 - 2023/3/2

N2 - In a recent article, Emanuel Rutten defends his Modal-Epistemic Argument (MEA) for the existence of God against various objections that I raised against it. In this article, I observe that Rutten’s defence fails for various reasons. Most notably though, the defence is self-undermining: the very claims that Rutten argues for in his defence yield novel counterexamples to the first premise of the MEA.

AB - In a recent article, Emanuel Rutten defends his Modal-Epistemic Argument (MEA) for the existence of God against various objections that I raised against it. In this article, I observe that Rutten’s defence fails for various reasons. Most notably though, the defence is self-undermining: the very claims that Rutten argues for in his defence yield novel counterexamples to the first premise of the MEA.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85149289344&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s11841-022-00939-8

DO - 10.1007/s11841-022-00939-8

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85149289344

SN - 0038-1527

VL - 62

SP - 1

EP - 15

JO - Sophia

JF - Sophia

IS - 1

ER -

The Modal-Epistemic Argument Self-undermined

Abstract

Bibliographical note

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this