Metaphysics of god - Ontological Argument Flashcards
whats a Priori argument
knowledge that doesn’t require experience of the world to be known e.g Bachelor is unmarried man - known through the meaning of the words ‘bachelor’ and ‘man’
whats Anselm’s argument (greatest possible being must exist)
God is defined as the greatest possible being. This concept is coherent and exists in our understanding. It’s greater to exist in reality rather than the understanding.
Therefore God exists.
whats Anselm’s argument - 2 beings explaination
If two beings are imagined - one who is perfectly great in everyway but doesn’t exist in reality or
- one that’s perfectly great in every way and does exist in reality. The second being seems to be greater and since God is the greatest possible being then he must be the second one and therefore exist in reality
whats the Response to Anselm’s argument - Gaunilo’s perfect island
Using this argument we can prove the existence of anything using other concepts in our head - We can imagine the greatest possible island and can coherently concieve of this island. It’s greater to exist in reality than in the mind, therefore this island must exist.
what is Gaunilo’s perfect island conclusion
It’s not enough to just understand God’s nature as being the greatest concievable being to prove his existence as this can apply to anything - therefore there must be a flaw in Anselm’s deductive argument and fails to prove God’s existence
whats Descartes argument for existence of god (properties)
There are things that exist in the mind that are possible to know the properties of e.g thinking of a triangle in the mind, we are able to know it’s properties ‘three sides’ etc, without having to encounter it through senses or the world. Just bc we haven’t, doesnt conclude they’re nothing.
So we can know existence is a property of God without having to encounter him
what are Descartes inseperable ideas
God is known to be supremely perfect and a supremely perfect beings must have all perfection. existence is a perfection, therefore god exists
whats Descartes argument conclusion
Predicates are a neccessary part of their subject - Existence is a predicate of God so to say he doesnt exist is a contradiction as saying ‘god exists’ is a tautology. It’s impossible to imagine God as not existing.
what are Kant’s objections to Anselm & Descartes
Existence is not a predicate of things like the way that ‘green’ is a property of ‘grass’ and if the property ‘existence’ is added to something, it doesn’t change it as a genuine predicate adds to the conception of something. (coin analogy). Therefore if existence isn’t a property of anything, then anslelm n descartes argument fail as they contain a false premise that existence is a predicate of god
whats Kant’s coin analogy
-consider 100 real coins and 100 possible coins
-our concepts of the real coins and the possible ones are identical
-so saying 100 coins exist isn’t adding a new property to the coins
-however, if i were to say these coins are now pink or round then our concept of them changes because a new property is identified.
what are Empiricist objections
Empiricist approach - empirical evidence is required to prove the existence of something as knowledge comes from experience
whats Humes fork - matters of fact
Known through experience and observation making it posteriori. No logical contradiction if it’s false. e.g the sun is shining
whats Humes fork - relations of ideas
Known through the meaning of the words themselves and isn’t dependant on experience making it a priori. Can’t be denied without logical contradiction e.g triangles have 3 sides
whats humes argument that god doesn’t exist IS a contradiction
Ontological arguments argue that the defenition of God involves existence and to say he doesnt is a contradiction - making ‘God exists’ a relation of ideas/analytic truth (as denying these guarantees contradiction) contradictions cant be coherently concieved e.g ‘a traingle has 4 sides’, you’ll either imagine a square or a triangle, a 4 sided triangle doesnt exist.
whats Humes argument that god does not exist ISNT a contradiction
it’s impossible for priori arguments to be used to try and prove the existence of something as it’s opposite must lead to a logical contradiction. however saying god doesnt exist can be coherently concieved (anything we can concieve of as existing can also be concieved of as-nonexistent) meaning it’s not a contradiciton & ontological argument fails.
