论康德与托马斯·阿奎那对存在论证明的批判

On Aquinas' and Kant's Critique of Ontological Proof

安瑟伦关于上帝存在的存在论证明自提出以来,就遭到过诸多批判。在西方哲学史上,关于这个证明的比较著名的批判主要来自托马斯.阿奎那和康德。托马斯.阿奎那把这个证明视作先天论证,认为从先天出发并不能证明这个证明,要想证明这个证明必须从后天出发。康德却视其为存在论证明,认为即使从后天出发,也不能为上帝存在提供证明。他把他的批判主要集中在"上帝到底是不是一个实在的谓词"上,认为从后天出发的证明——宇宙论证明和自然神学证明,依然是"伪装的存在论证明",证明不了"上帝存在"这个命题。康德在哲学史上第一次真正击中了存在论证明的中枢神经,动摇了该证明。

Aselem＇s ontological proof on God＇s existence had suffered a lot of criticisms since its presentation. Among the most prominent criticisms in the history of western philosophy are those from Thomas Aquinas and Kant. Aquinas regarded the proof as a priori argument, and he held that it could not prove the evidence of God＇s existence with the exception that people started from the post-priori experiences. While Kant eirticized this proof, for he believed that the post-priori argument also could not prove the evidence of God＇s existence. He named the priori argument as the ontological argument. Kant focused his criticism on the idea of ＂God in the end is not a real predicate＂. He thought that the proof starting from the post-priori experiences--cosmological and theological argument--could not demonstrate the proposition of God＇s existence. Because they were still the disguised ontological proofs. As a result, Kant became the first man in the history of pilosophy to hit the key of the ontological argument and shaked the proof.