本体论证明失效了吗?——门德尔松对康德的一个回应  

Has the Ontological Proof Failed?——From Moses Mendelssohn’s Response to Kant

作　　者：刘伟冬 Liu Weidong

机构地区：[1]黑龙江大学

出　　处：《德国哲学》2022年第2期98-109,317,共13页Chinese Journal of German Philosophy

基　　金：国家社科基金青年项目“耶可比主要著作的翻译与研究”(项目编号:20CZX044)。

摘　　要：康德认为通过纯粹理性证明上帝实存的方式只能有三种,即自然神学证明、宇宙论证明与本体论证明,而这三种方式最终都可回溯到后者。康德通过对这三种证明方式的批判,指出纯粹理性无法证明上帝实存。而摩西·门德尔松作为莱布尼茨—沃尔夫体系的继承者,为维护理性的至上权威,需要对康德做出回应。门德尔松主要通过对有限存在者与无限存在者的区分以及他的谓词理论来维护本体论证明。很难断定门德尔松完全成功,但他至少削弱了康德批判的力量。Kant believes that there are only three ways to prove the existence of God through pure reason,namely natural theological proof,cosmological proof and ontological proof,and these three ways can be traced back to the latter in the end.Kant pointed out that pure reason cannot prove the existence of God through the criticism of these three proof methods.And Moses Mendelssohn,as the successor of Leibniz-Wolff system,needs to respond to Kant in order to maintain the supremacy of reason.Mendelssohn defends ontological proofs mainly through the distinction between finite and infinite beings and his predicate theory.It is difficult to conclude that Mendelssohn was entirely successful,but he at least weakened the power of Kant’s critique.

关 键 词：本体论 实在性 门德尔松 康德 

分 类 号：B516.31[哲学宗教—外国哲学] B516.39