Metaphysics as the Study of Non-Restrictive Existential Statements
Keywords:
metaphysics, ontological argument, cosmological application, Charles Hartshorne, Franklin GamwellAbstract
In this short article I initiate a defense of the Hartshornian claim that metaphysics is the study of non-restrictive existential statements. Two metaphysical claims are defended: "Something exists" and "God exists." The latter claim is defended via a modal version of the ontological argument. I argue that metaphysical claims are those that apply necessarily or cosmically rather than contingently or locally.
That is, if they are affirmative, they at least implicitly deny something; further, if they are negative, they at least implicitly affirm something. For example, if I say that the corkscrew is in the drawer, I am denying that the drawer is filled with things other than corkscrews. Or if I say that there is no corkscrew in the drawer, I am affirming that everything in the drawer is something other than a corkscrew.
The above statements are partially restrictive, in contrast to those that are either completely restrictive or completely non-restrictive. A completely restrictive statement is one that denies that any existential possibility is realized. An example would be saying that “absolutely nothing exists.” A completely non-restrictive statement is exemplified in the claim that “something exists.” This latter claim is the contradictory of the wholly restrictive statement that “absolutely nothing exists.” I will argue that the claim that “absolutely nothing exists” expresses an impossibility rather than a conceivable but unrealized fact (as in the possibility that there could be a corkscrew in the drawer even if there is no corkscrew there at present). A contradictory of an impossible statement is necessarily true, hence it will be no surprise to learn that I will also argue that the statement that “something exists” is necessarily true.
References
Dombrowski, Daniel. Rethinking the Ontological Argument: A Neoclassical Theistic Response. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006.
---. “Contingent Creativity as Necessary.” Cosmos and History: The Journal of Natural and Social Philosophy 13.2 (2017): 384-400.
---. Process Mysticism. Albany: State University of New York Press, 2023.
Gamwell, Franklin. Existence and the Good: Metaphysical Necessity in Morals and Politics. Albany: State University of New York Press, 2011.
---. On Metaphysical Necessity: Essays on God, the World, Morality, and Democracy. Albany: State University of New York Press, 2020.
Hartshorne, Charles. “Ethics and the New Theology.” International Journal of Ethics 45.1 (1934): 90-101.
---. The Logic of Perfection. LaSalle, IL: Open Court, 1962.
---. Anselm’s Discovery. LaSalle, IL: Open Court, 1965.
---. Creative Synthesis and Philosophic Method. LaSalle, IL: Open Court, 1970.
Popper, Karl. Objective Knowledge. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1972.
Shields, George. “The Return of Radical Theology.” Process Studies 43.2 (2014): 29-46.
Whitehead, Alfred North, and Bertrand Russell. Principia Mathematica. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1929.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Daniel A. Dombrowski
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.