1F: Challenges to the Ontological Argument

Question 1

Who challenged the Ontological Argument?

Answer 1

• Gaunilo
• Immanuel Kant

Question 2

Who was Gaunilo?

Answer 2

• 11th-century French monk and contemporary of Anselm.
• apart from his response to Anselm’s ontological argument, there are no surviving writings or further knowledge of him

Question 3

Who was Immanuel Kant?

Answer 3

• German philosopher who was very influential in the history of western philosophy.

Question 4

What was Gaunilo’s criticism?

Answer 4

• tried to show that Anselm’s ontological argument was logically ridiculous. This is because using Gaunilo’s logic you could claim anything that you describe from your mind ‘as the greatest’ must also exist in reality.
• he used the example of an island to illustrate his point. He said if someone were to describe to you ‘the greatest island’ they had created in their mind. However if they were then to state that it must exist as it would not be the greatest island, if it did not exist.
• Gaunilo states because the two arguments have the same logic form, they must stand or fall together. As the greatest island existing in reality is clearly absurd, all similar arguments must also fail.

Question 5

What was Anselm’s reply back to Gaunilo?

Answer 5

• Anselm claimed Gaunilo’s island criticism does not stand up as it is impossible to imagine an island that is the greatest. This is because an island has no ‘Intrinsic Maximum’, i.e. you can always add a tree to improve an island. However God by definition is the greatest
• therefore only God can be described as the greatest, unlike the island. Therefore Anselm claims his argument can only apply to God and not anything else.

Question 6

Kant: criticism 1 - existence is not a predicate:

Answer 6

• Descartes argued that every object had certain predicates that make it an object, e.g. triangles have three sides etc. Kant agreed with this however added that existence is not a predicate.
• this is because the predicates of something are describing its nature and it does not alter the nature of something if it exists or not.
• e.g. whether a triangle exists or not does not alter the predicates of a triangle.
• therefore Kant argued that whilst a ‘supremely perfect being’ may gave several predicates one of then cannot be existence. As a result argues that Descartes has not proved God’s existence.

Question 7

Kant: criticism 2 - analytical criticism:

Answer 7

• all the ontological arguments depend upon us accepting the definitions of the nature of God (e.g. Anselm - God is the Greatest, Descartes - God is Supremely Perfect) as analytical statements.
• Anselm, Descartes and Malcolm were all religious, and therefore would believe their definitions were analytical statement however thus was because they already believed in God.
• Kant argued this wasn’t enough, Kant argued that they needed to prove their definitions. E.g. how does Anselm know God’s nature. Thus Kant would ask ‘empirically prove that God is the greatest’ and of course Anselm (and others) never did.