Ontological Argument

Question 1

Ontological Argument

Answer 1

Tries to prove that God exists based on who God is
Ontological = the study of being
A priori - uses reasoning that comes before experience, theoretical and analytical deduction to try to prove God’s existence
Deductive - aims to prove without question
Works from definitions outwards

Question 2

A priori reasoning

Answer 2

Reasoning that uses analytical deduction

Question 3

Anselm’s first formulation

Answer 3

Definition of God is that which nothing greater can be thought of
It is greater to exist in reality than just in the mind
As God is the greatest thing that can be thought of then he must exist both in the mind and reality

Question 4

Anselm’s second formulation

Answer 4

Response to Gaunilo - Isalnd = contingent, God = necessary
Contingent - beings that can be imagined not the exist
Necessary - beings that cannot not exist
Necessary beings are greater than contingent beings
Therefore God must be necessary and must exist

Question 5

Gaunilo’s perfect island

Answer 5

Claims the flaws in Anselm’s logic are made obvious when replacing God with an island
The lost island is defined as the greatest conceivable island
It is greater to exist in reality instead of merely as an idea
If the Lost island did not exist, then you could have an idea of an even greater island, which did exist
So the lost island must exist in reality
We cannot bring something into existence by defining it as superlative

Question 6

Kant’s criticism

Answer 6

Existence is not a predicate.’ In other words, existence is not a characteristic or an attribute of something. We are only thinking about a concept when we are thinking of God.

2 kinds of statements: Analytic (saying nothing new about the world), Synthetic (says something about the world). Kant thinks that when philosophers say that ‘God is a necessary being’ or ‘God has to exist’ they are making an analytic statement. In other words, they are talking about what words mean not whether God exists or not.

Question 7

Descartes’ argument for

Answer 7

Thought that we understand such concepts as equality, cause, shape and number from birth; he also believed that we are born with an understanding of what God is. Used the analogy of a triangle. Claimed that existence is part of the essence of God, just as three angles adding up to 180 are the essence of a triangle. He would say existence is part of the essence of God.

Question 8

Plantinga’s argument for

Answer 8

Islands are different to God- there could always be a more perfect island - more dancing girls, palm trees etc - idea of the greatest possible island is incoherent. God on the other hand is maximally great - nothing greater is possible.

Question 9

Aquinas’ criticism

Answer 9

The existence of God could only be demonstrated by a posteriori rather than a priori knowledge. God’s existence cannot be regarded as self-evident. Aquinas questioned whether everyone would accept Anselm’s definition of God. Aquinas believed that although we can approach an understanding and awareness of God, God will always remain unknowable to the finite human mind

Question 10

Bertrand Russell’s criticism

Answer 10

Criticised by asking us to think of the statement ‘the present king of France is bald’. This statement is not true. However, does it mean, therefore that the statement is a true statement? Our use of words and the way we apply predicates, such as bald or not bald is not enough to demonstrate that something exists, and when we start applying predicates to something whose existence is a matter of uncertainty, we cannot expect the normal rules of linguistic knowledge to apply.