Meditation V

Question 1

Explain Descartes’ version of the ontological argument for the existence of God.

Answer 1

1. Descartes observes that in my clear and distinct apprehension of mathematical and geometrical ideas, I realize that they have their own real and immutable natures/essences that are beyond my control.
2. Descartes then asks: if all that I clearly and distinctly recognize as characteristic of a thing in reality does characterize it, can I not derive from this, an argument which will prove the existence of God?
3. But, as stated above, although a triangle must have three sides and its internal angles must add up to 180 degrees, it does not follow that a figure of a triangle must exist outside of my mind. Clearly, the predicate of existence is not part of what it means to be a triangle; real triangles apart from my idea of a triangle may or may not exist.
4. The idea of God, however, is different. The idea of the divine essence, being that of infinite perfection, must include existence as one of those perfections. Certainly, “existence” is greater perfection than non-existence, or, if you like, non-existence is no perfection at all.
5. Hence, if I am to think of the idea of the divine essence, that is, of a supremely perfect being, I must conceive of God as necessarily having the perfection/property/predicate of “existence.”
6. Hence, God must necessarily exist.

Question 2

Explain Kant’s critique of the ontological argument, based on the predicate of existence.

Answer 2

Distinguishing between analytic and synthetic judgments: Kant makes a fundamental distinction between analytic and synthetic judgments. Analytic judgments are those in which the predicate is contained within the subject and are true by definition (e.g., “All bachelors are unmarried”). Synthetic judgments, on the other hand, add new information to the subject and are not true by definition (e.g., “The cat is on the mat”).

Existence as a synthetic predicate: Kant argues that existence is a synthetic predicate, meaning it adds new information to a concept or subject and is not contained within its definition. He asserts that existence is not an inherent property or attribute of an object or concept. Consequently, existence cannot be deduced solely from the concept or definition of a thing.

Existence as a real predicate: Kant maintains that existence is not a real predicate, meaning it does not add any additional qualities or attributes to an object. He argues that existence merely affirms the actuality of a concept or subject without providing any new content or characteristics. According to Kant, existence is not a property that can be ascribed to an object as part of its nature.

Critique of the ontological argument: Based on these premises, Kant critiques the ontological argument’s reliance on the predicate of existence. He argues that existence cannot be treated as a predicate that adds something substantial to the concept of God. In the ontological argument, the proponents claim that by defining God as a supremely perfect being, existence is included as a necessary attribute. Kant counters this by asserting that existence cannot be included as a predicate or attribute of an object, as it does not provide any new content or qualities to the concept of God.

Rejecting the proof from mere concepts: Kant rejects the notion that the existence of God can be proven solely through the analysis of concepts or definitions. He argues that existence is not a predicate that can be deduced from concepts alone. Kant maintains that the proof of existence requires empirical or experiential evidence, which is beyond the scope of mere concepts or logical reasoning.