Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

How Philosophers ArgueAnalysis of Segment II: Discussion of Copleston’s Metaphysical Argument

How Philosophers Argue: Analysis of Segment II: Discussion of Copleston’s Metaphysical Argument [Segment II of the debate is the longest and tackles the most difficult part of the whole debate: the cosmological argument for God’s existence, what Copleston calls ‘the metaphysical argument’, which he considers a proper proof. Segment II contains sixty turns (from 11 to 70), i.e. almost half of the debate. This segment starts with a complicated version of the cosmological argument, although other simpler formulations are later given. The discussion is inconclusive because on several occasions an unbridgeable gap opens between the concepts and methods of the two philosophers, who find necessary to discuss possible common starting points, without much success.] http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png

How Philosophers ArgueAnalysis of Segment II: Discussion of Copleston’s Metaphysical Argument

Part of the Argumentation Library Book Series (volume 41)
Leal, Fernando; Marraud, Hubert
How Philosophers Argue — Feb 21, 2022
Download PDF
84 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/springer-journals/how-philosophers-argue-analysis-of-segment-ii-discussion-of-copleston-GWWPFZYpKJ

References (19)

Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Copyright
© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022
ISBN
978-3-030-85367-9
Pages
107 –191
DOI
10.1007/978-3-030-85368-6_5
Publisher site
See Chapter on Publisher Site

Abstract

[Segment II of the debate is the longest and tackles the most difficult part of the whole debate: the cosmological argument for God’s existence, what Copleston calls ‘the metaphysical argument’, which he considers a proper proof. Segment II contains sixty turns (from 11 to 70), i.e. almost half of the debate. This segment starts with a complicated version of the cosmological argument, although other simpler formulations are later given. The discussion is inconclusive because on several occasions an unbridgeable gap opens between the concepts and methods of the two philosophers, who find necessary to discuss possible common starting points, without much success.]

Published: Feb 21, 2022

There are no references for this article.