# name
God and Necessity. The Ontological Argument and Plantinga’s Modal Argument

# metadata.dc.description[].value
Màster en Filosofia Analítica (APhil), Facultat Filosofía, Universitat de Barcelona, Curs: 2022-2023, Director/Tutor: José Martínez Fernández

# metadata.dc.description.abstract[].value
This essay purports to criticize the modal version of the ontological argument,
a classical argument that pretends to be a proof for the existence of God, put forward by
Alvin Plantinga in his book The Nature of Necessity , which tries to prove God’s necessary
existence . The essay first considers the ontological argument in its classical form, as it
was formulated by Anselm of Canterbury in his Proslogion . Then it considers other
versions of the argument (such as those of Descartes and Leibniz) and criticisms directed
to it (by, for example, Gaunilo and Kant). Finally, Plantinga’s argument is analyzed and
considered, fo llowed by some criticisms, that purport to show the circular and question
begging nature of the argument The conclusions arrived at in this paper may shed light
to the fact that, to some extent, this is a problem that all versions of the argument face, so
that the ontological argument, independently of whether one believes in the existence of
God, will stand as a failed piece of natural theology.

# metadata.dc.title[].value
God and Necessity. The Ontological Argument and Plantinga’s Modal Argument