Sublime

Degrees of guilt can still be judged by reference to the facts of a case: the

The philosopher Erik Wielenberg argues for this, what he calls “non-natural non-theistic moral realism.”

Hume claimed that the traditional arguments for God’s existence (for example, the world is an effect that needs a personal cause) were quite weak. He also said that since we cannot experience God with the five senses, the claim that God exists cannot be taken as an item of knowledge.

Thomas Aquinas rejected it, and among theologians his authority has prevailed ever since. But among philosophers it has had a better fate. Descartes revived it in a somewhat amended form; Leibniz thought that it could be made valid by the addition of a supplement to prove that God is possible. Kant considered that he had demolished it once for all.

‘Anselm's ontological argument’.1 In one version or another, ontological arguments are particularly appealing to many philosophers. This appeal has something to do with the remarkable fact that we are supposed to be able to find out, just by thinking correctly, all that we need to know to see them prove their point.