eval challenges to the ontological argument

Question 1

what did guanilo use to prove Anselm’s argument as absurd? what analogy did he use to prove this?

Answer 1

• reduction ad absurdism
• anselm: we can argue the existence of god through the definition of god
• used the analogy of the most perfect island, just because we can conceive a perfect island doesn’t mean it exists in reality

Question 2

how is guanilos perfect island analogy criticised

Answer 2

• doesn’t take into account that anselm’s claims were directed at god only

Question 3

how did anselm respond to guanilo’s perfect island analogy?

Answer 3

• said god is unique, only god has necessary existence
• guanilos island is contingent, so possesses no intrinsic maximum (can add to it to make it more perfect) - the same cannot be said for god

Question 4

did kant support or criticise descartes’ form of the argument?

Answer 4

• criticise

Question 5

what did kant argue about gods existence? why?

Answer 5

• it is inaccurate to describe existence as perfection
• existence is not a property a thing possesses, so existence cannot be an essential property of a thing
• perfections = attributes = predicates

Question 6

support for Kants argument?

Answer 6

• existence cannot be a predicate because it doesn’t describe anything about the nature of an object
• all other predicates describe gods nature
• to say god exists doesn’t tell us anything about gods existence

Question 7

criticism of Kants argument

Answer 7

• doesn’t work when we apply to anselm’s argument in proslogion 2 (something that exists only in the mind is not as good as something that exists in the mind and reality)

Question 8

criticism of the ontological argument being abstract and conceptual

Answer 8

• doesn’t appeal to everyone
• seems like a confusing intellectual puzzle
• little relevance to everyday questions of belief

Question 9

why is saying the ontological argument is abstract and conceptual a weak argument?

Answer 9

• because the argument may not be designed to convince everyone
• Anselm recognised that it is unlikely to convince a non-believer ‘faith seeking understanding’

Question 10

criticism of ‘god of the gaps’ which supports ontological argument

Answer 10

• may not be that the cause must be god because only god fits the requirements, but because we created god to fit the requirements as we are otherwise unable to explain
• ontological argument focuses on defining god, but many (eg Aquinas) believe that god is transcendent and beyond human understanding

Question 11

criticism of ontological argument - arguments are circular

Answer 11

• require us to accept a definition of god before the argument
• malcom criticised anselm and descartes for this: you cannot add the concept of existence to a list of qualities that something has had and then claim it exists