Another Short Argument: Against Atheistic Platonism

I just wrote this argument out in the comments section on Dr. Alexander Pruss’ blog, and when looking it over I decided I liked it so much that I might as well post it on my own blog. Enjoy.

1. Platonic Forms are ideas.
2. Ideas never exist apart from a mind.
3. Platonic Forms are necessary (obtain in all logically possible worlds).
4. Therefore, all logically possible worlds include at least one mind.
5. There are logically possible worlds in which no contingent mind exists.
6. Therefore, there must be at least one logically possible world in which one necessary mind exists.
7. If there is at least one logically possible world in which a necessary mind exists then there is at least one logically possible world in which a necessary being exists.
8. Therefore, there is at least one logically possible world in which a necessary being exists.
9. If there is at least one logically possible world in which a necessary being exists then a necessary being exists in all logically possible worlds.
10. Therefore, a necessary being exists in all logically possible worlds.
11. If a necessary being exists in all logically possible worlds, then a necessary being exists.
12. Therefore, a necessary being exists.

Advertisements

About tylerjourneaux

I am an aspiring Catholic theologian and philosopher, and I have a keen interest in apologetics. I am creating this blog both in order to practice and improve my writing and memory retention as I publish my thoughts, and in order to give evidence of my ability to understand and communicate thoughts on topics pertinent to Theology, Philosophy, philosophical theology, Catholic (Christian) Apologetics, philosophy of religion and textual criticism.
This entry was posted in Metaphysics, Natural Theology, Philosophy and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to Another Short Argument: Against Atheistic Platonism

  1. Premise 2 is too ambiguous – there is obviously a logically possible world where some idea exists apart from ‘a’ (indefinite article) mind. I should have said:

    Premise 2*: No Idea can exist apart from ‘any’ mind
    or, perhaps,
    Premise2**: No idea can exist apart from ‘every’ mind.

    The Platonist may want to say that Universals are not ideas (but that seems implausible), or that they are ideas which exist apart from any and every mind (which also seems implausible). However, maybe the most this argument does is demonstrate that Theism is more plausible than Atheistic Platonism (at least absent other possible considerations – though it’s hard to think what considerations could tip the weights back in the favor of Atheistic Platonism).

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s