1.3 Ontological Argument

Question 1

a priori

Answer 1

known before or without sense experience (based on reason)

Question 2

ontos

Answer 2

‘of being’ or ‘essence’ in existence

Question 3

ogi

Answer 3

the study of

Question 4

predicate

Answer 4

gives us infomation about the subject

Question 5

synthetic proposition

Answer 5

having truth or falsity determinable by experience

Question 6

analytic proposition

Answer 6

a proposition or statement that is coherent to doubt (e.g. triangles have three sides)

Question 7

Contingent

Answer 7

something which is not necessary, depends on something else for its existence

Question 8

Necessary

Answer 8

used to refer to something which has to be that way and cannot be different

Question 9

deductive

Answer 9

The premises offer logical support for the conclusion. If the premises are true the conclusion must be true

Question 10

Anselm’s First Proof

Answer 10

• Anselm was a monk who sought proof for God’s existence which he set out as an ontological argument.
• His first proof focus’ on the idea that God can be defined as a being ‘that which nothing greater can be conceived’
• Even non-believers have to have a definition of God, if only to dismiss his existence therefore God exists in the mind.
• Anselm argues God must also exist in reality because God is a being that ‘nothing greater can be conceived’ and that which exists in reality is greater than that which exists in the mind.

Question 11

Gaunilo (argument against Anselm’s first proof)

Answer 11

• Gaunilo points out the absurdity that by defining God you can be certain of his existence. He says this means anything can be brought into existence e.g. a unicorn
• He uses a reductio ad absurdum argument. The fact we can conceive the greatest possible being does not mean it exists. God has to be proved by fact - not definition.
• He uses his wonderous island analogy to show how logic can be transferred into anything - potentially proving you can’t define into existence

Question 12

Gaunilo’s Argument

Answer 12

P1: We can imagine an island which is the greatest conceivable island
P2: It is greater to exist in reality than merely in understanding
C: Therefore the greatest conceivable island must exist in reality.

The most conceivable island doesn’t make sense because it does not exist.
Anselm’s response - God is not like an island he is a necessary being

Question 13

Anselm’s second proof
(Counter argument to Gaunilo’s Island)

Answer 13

Demonstrates existence is necessary - no possibility of him not existing. The idea of a non-existent greatest possible being is a contradiction.
P1 God is the greatest conceivable being
P2 The greatest conceivable being cannot be conceived not to exist.
C God and God alone possesses necessary existence: God cannot not exist

Question 14

Descartes’ Ontological Argument
(does not accept the claim God exists in understanding)

Answer 14

• Characterises God as a supremely perfect being THIS IS GOD’S ESSENCE
• God’s existence is ‘clear and distinct’ in the same way a triangle includes having three angles. God’s existence is a necessary predicate of God.
  -Argument is grounded in innate ideas - the idea some concepts of God are built into the human mind.
• God’s existence is inferred directly from the fact that necessary existence is contained in the clear and distinct idea of a supremely perfect idea. Once we understand the concept of God, we understand he exists.

Question 15

Descartes’ form of argument

Answer 15

P1 God is a supremely perfect being
P2 A supremely perfect being contains all the perfections
P3 Existence is a supreme perfection
C God as a supremely perfect being exists

Question 16

Aquinas’ Criticism (rejects Anselm’s form of OA)

Answer 16

• If we knew God’s essence, then we would also know he existed. However, we don’t know his essence so the argument falls.
  -We do not start with an agreed essence of God. Even if we did agree there is no way of knowing your correct.
• Any discussions of God must be based on synthetic statements not analytic as Anselm does.
• Says Descartes is wrong for holding the idea God is innate.

Question 17

Hume’s Criticism

Answer 17

• Hume agrees with Aquinas. It is not possible to take a concept, use logic to reach a conclusion (priori) and then apply that conclusion in the external universe (a posteriori).
• Argues we cannot treat existence as a predicate that something can have or not have, adding existence to a thing does not change its definition.
• The proposition ‘God exists’ is not analytic because ‘God’ does not contain the idea of existence. The statement God exists is synthetic not analytic.
  EXISTENCE ISNT A PREDICATE

Question 18

Kant’s Criticism

Answer 18

• Even if existence is a necessary property of God, this does not mean he exists
• Existence is not a property of God or anything else.

1. You can have propositions that are true by definition (where the subject & predicate are inseparable), but this doesn’t mean the subject refers to anything in the world e.g. unicorns are horned horses.
2. Existence is not a property of God because it is not a property of anything. Existence just states that a concept has actuality…

Question 19

How Kant redefines the ontological argument

Answer 19

The OA fails because it omits one small but powerful word ‘if’.
With unicorns: If there are unicorns then they will be horses with horns.
With God: If there is a God, then God will exist necessarily

Question 20

Russell’s criticisms

Answer 20

• Agrees with Kant existence is not a predicate
• Argues that if existence were a predicate we could construct the following argument 1. Men exist in the world 2. Santa Claus is a man 3. Santa Claus exists
• To say God exists is to say something in our world corresponds to our concept of God (omniscient, omnipotent).
  -It is much more difficult to find empirical evidence for God

Question 21

aseity

Answer 21

Self-sufficiency, having an existence originating from and having no source other than itself.