Ontological Argument

Question 1

Ontological Arguments

Answer 1

The ontological argument are deductive arguments that attempt to prove the existence of God, so long as we properly analyse and understand the concept of God. The premises of the ontological argument are a priori, and these proofs are not based on empirical experience or observation.

Question 2

Anselm’s ontological argument

Answer 2

P1. God is defined as the greatest possible being that than which nothing greater can be conceived.
P2. Even an atheist can conceive of God as the greatest possible being, it is a coherent concept that exists in our understanding.
P3. It is greater to exist in the understanding AND the reality rather than in the understanding alone.
C. Therefore the greatest possible being, God, must exist in the understanding AND in reality.

Question 3

Descartes’ ontological argument

Answer 3

Descartes concludes that it is impossible to separate the existence of such a God from God’s essence.

P1. I have an idea of God, a supremely perfect being.
P2. A supremely perfect being must have all perfections.
P3. Existence is a perfection.
C. God therefore exists.

Question 4

Some predicates are a necessary part of their subject

Answer 4

‘internal angles add up to 180degrees’ is part of the concept of ‘triangle’. Descartes makes it clear that he thinks of ‘existence’ as a predicate which is part of the definition of ‘God’.

Question 5

Malcom’s ontological argument

Answer 5

P1. God cannot come into existence as nothing can cause God to exist.
P2. So if God does not exist, then his existence is impossible.
P3. God cannot cease to exist as nothing can cause God to cease to exist.
P4. So if God does exist, then his existence is necessary.
C1. Therefore God’s existence is either impossible or necessary.
P5. Something’s existence is not self-contradictory.
P6. God’s existence is not impossible.
P7. Therefore God’s existence is not impossible.
C2. Therefore God’s existence is necessary and God necessarily exists.

Question 6

Hicks Criticism

Answer 6

P1. God’s existence is either impossible or necessary.
P2. God’s existence is not LOGICALLY impossible because its denial is not self-contradictory.
C. Therefore God exists as an ontologically necessary being.

Hick argues that the conclusion doesn’t follow from P2, as Malcom is drawing a conclusion about ontological necessity from a premise about logical necessity.

Question 7

Gaunilo’s ‘perfect island’ objection

Answer 7

P3. It is more perfect to exists in our understanding AND in reality, rather than in the understanding alone.
C. Therefore the perfect island must exist.

Gaunilo concludes that someone who puts forward such an argument to prove the existence of something is a fool. What is needed is to establish the real and indubitable fact of the existence of this island. The same goes for God - it is not enough to understand the nature of God as the greatest conceivable being in order to prove His existence. Anselm’s ontological argument fails.

Question 8

Empiricist objections to a priori arguments for existence

Answer 8

The ontological argument aims to prove the existence of God a priori, based on premises that require no empirical foundations and proceeding by deduction.

Question 9

Hume’s objection

Answer 9

Matters of fact- we know these through experience and observations

Relations of ideas- We know these through analysing our ideas, how they are defined, and how they are connected to each other

Question 10

Kant’s objection based on existence not being a predicate

Answer 10

P1. A genuine predicate adds to our conception of a subject and helps to determine it.
P2. ‘Existence’ does not add to our conception of a subject and helps to determine it.
C. Therefore existence is not a genuine predicate.