Affiliation:
1. Department of Philosophy, School of Christian Thought Apologetics, Houston Christian University, Houston, TX 77074, USA
Abstract
John Hare argues that Kant, in his Third Critique, offers an aesthetic argument for God’s existence that shares premises with his famous moral argument. Karl Ameriks demurs, expressing skepticism that this is so. In this paper, I stake out an intermediate position, arguing that the resources of Kant provide ingredients for an aesthetic argument, but one distinctly less than a transcendental argument for God or an entailment relation. Whether the argument is best thought of as abductive in nature, a C-inductive argument, or a Pascalian natural sign, prospects for its formulation are strong. And such an argument, for its resonances with the moral argument(s), can work well in tandem with it (them), a fact not surprising at all if Kant was right that beauty—in accordance with an ancient Greek tradition—exists in close organic relation to the good. More generally, along the way, I argue that the sea change in Kant’s studies over the last decade or so should help us see that Kant is an ally, rather than foe, to aesthetic theodicists.
Reference41 articles.
1. Adams, Marilyn McCord (1999). Horrendous Evils and the Goodness of God, Cornell University Press.
2. Ameriks, Karl The Retrieval of Objectivist Aesthetics in Kant, Beethoven, and John Hare: ‘Diesen Kuß der ganzen Welt’, Unpublished.
3. The Phenomenological Moral Argument: A New Formulation of a Classic Theistic Defense;Ashbach;Philosophia Christi,2019
4. Rediscovering the Aesthetic Argument;Ashbach;Philosophia Christi,2021
5. Ayer, A. J. (1952). Language, Truth, and Logic, Dover Publications.
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献