PDC Homepage

Home » Products » Purchase

Philo

Volume 7, Issue 1, Spring-Summer 2004

Colin P. Ruloff
Pages 71-78
DOI: 10.5840/philo2004716

Plantinga’s S5 Modal Argument, Obvious Entailment, and Circularity
Response to Sennett

In the second chapter of his Modality, Probability and Rationality, James Sennett argues that Plantinga’s famed S5 Modal Argument (hereafter “MA”) for the existence of an unsurpassably great being is objectionably circular since it’s impossible for one to understand the premises of Plantinga’s MA without understanding these premises to logically entail its conclusion. That is to say, Sennett’s charge is that Plantinga’s MA is circular since there is no understanding of the premises of Plantinga’s MA that is independent of its conclusion. In this paper I argue that Sennett has shown no such thing and that, contrary to strong prima facie appearances, there is an understanding of the premises of Plantinga’s MA that is independent of its conclusion. Consequently, Plantinga’s MA is not circular in the way that Sennett alleges.

Not yet a subscriber? Subscribe here
Already a subscriber? Login here

This document may be purchased

Purchase this article for
$20.00 USD
Enter your confirmation number if you've already purchased this article.