The Ontological Argument
Download
Report
Transcript The Ontological Argument
The Ontological
Argument
Must God logically exist?
The Ontological Argument
Four main contributors to the argument
Anselm
Descartes
Gaunilo
Kant
The Ontological Argument
An a priori argument
Based on innate knowledge
logic
Attempts to prove existence of God from the
meaning of the word ‘God’
Depends on a particular understanding of
God
St Anselm of Canterbury
1033 -1109
Book – Proslogion
Classical concept of God
Omnipotent
Omniscient
All powerful
Can do anything
Knows all things, past, present and future
Omnipresent
Present at every place at same time
Anselm’s first argument
Anselm defined God as:
‘that than which nothing greater can be
conceived’
Everyone must have a definition of God
Therefore God exists in the mind
Even the atheist
Just as dragons exist in the mind
And therefore:
God must exist in reality because He is:
‘that than which nothing greater can be
conceived’
Gaunilo’s objection
If I were to describe the most perfect
Island
Then state that it must exist because of
its perfection
You would be a fool to believe me
Criticism of Gaunilo
Not comparing Like with Like
Anselm talks of
‘that than which nothing greater can be
conceived’
A greater Island can always be
conceived
Anselm’s second argument
Must be more to God than fact that He
exists
That would make him similar to us
Therefore God must be ‘necessary’
That is there is no possibility of Him not existing
Anselm’s second argument
It can be conceived that something
exists that cannot be thought not to exist
God must be such a thing if He is
‘that than which nothing greater can be
conceived’
This is because something that can be
thought not to exist would be inferior to
that which cannot
Descartes
1596-1650
Descartes argument
God is a supremely perfect being
Existence is a predicate of a perfect being
PREDICATE - the part of a sentence in which
something is said about the subject
Trying to image God without the predicate of
existence is illogical
Like a triangle without 3 sides
Kant
1724-1804
Kant’s objection
Opposed Descartes
Triangles
If you dismiss the idea of 3 sides (predicate)
And you dismiss the idea of the triangle (subject)
There is no contradiction
You can define a thing as you think fit
But that does not mean it exists
Kant’s objection
Opposed Anselm
Existence is not a predicate
To say that X exists tells you nothing about X
A predicate must say something about X
‘X is’ does not tell us anything about X
If ‘X exists’ tells us about a property of X then
‘X does not exist’ must tell us what X lacks
However, how can something that does not
exist lack anything?
Putting it together
Write bullet points that show how you
would go about answering the following
exam question:
(a) Explain the traditional forms of the ontological
argument put forward by Anselm and Descartes
(33)
(b) ‘The criticisms presented by Gaunilo and Kant
successfully reject these arguments.’ Discuss (17)