Talk:The Only Possible Argument in Support of a Demonstration of the Existence of God

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles

Philosophy: Literature / Religion / Continental / Modern Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Philosophical literature
	Philosophy of religion
	Continental philosophy
	Modern philosophy

Remove tag[edit]

As I recall, Kant is criticizing attempts to prove the existence of God through Anselm's work and not Christian theology (as Anselm's work is not Christian doctrine). Would it be acceptable to remove the critical of Christianity tag?64.228.75.250 01:22, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like it's gone. --67.189.44.169 (talk) 18:59, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Where does the quote start?[edit]

There is a closing quote but no opening quote for Manfred Kuehn. Does someone know where the quote starts? --67.189.44.169 (talk) 18:59, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(Didn't log in) --KSnortum (talk) 19:01, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Religion?[edit]

To place this work of Kant in the category "books of religion" is actually inexact, because it is a philosophical work rather than a religious one. The work has the intention to analyze the idea of God from the rationalism rather than from religion. There is a big difference in both positions. Religion accept the idea of God from what it calls revelation, then, the role of the faithful is believe in it without further questions. In stead, philosophy does not take revelation as a valid evidence, but goes through the help of rationis and logoi. Therefore, it is an erratic classification to say that The Only Possible Argument in Support of a Demonstration of the Existence of God is a "Book on Religion.

--Albeiror24 - English - Español - Italiano 01:13, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]