Ontological Argument

Question 1

What kind of argument is the ontological argument?

Answer 1

– A priori
– Deductive

Question 2

A priori

Answer 2

It is not based on experience but logic or pure reason

Question 3

Deductive

Answer 3

The truth of its premises logically entails the truth of its conclusion

Question 4

Who formulated the ontological argument?

Answer 4

Anselm of Canterbury

Question 5

Anselm of Canterbury

Answer 5

A medieval theologian and philosopher who formulated the ontological argument

Question 6

In what work did Anselm of Canterbury formulate the ontological argument?

Answer 6

Proslogion

Question 7

What is the ontological argument?

Answer 7

The ontological argument posits that the very concept of a perfect or necessary being implies its existence – as existence is a necessary attribute of such a being

Question 8

Anselm of Canterbury ontological argument quote

Answer 8

Anselm defines God as a being “than which nothing greater can be conceived”

Question 9

What analogy does Anselm use?

Answer 9

The analogy of a painter who has an idea of what they will paint in their mind before creating the painting in reality

Question 10

Necessary Being

Answer 10

A being whose existence is essential and cannot be conceived otherwise – such as God in the ontological argument

Question 11

Greatest Conceivable Being

Answer 11

A term used in the ontological argument to describe the concept of a being that possesses all perfections to the highest degree

Question 12

Existence as a Predicate

Answer 12

The idea that existence can be considered a characteristic or quality of something and that the existence of a necessary being is greater than the non-existence of that being

Question 13

What is a method of argumentation used by critics to challenge the validity of the ontological argument?

Answer 13

Reductio ad Absurdum

Question 14

Reductio ad Absurdum

Answer 14

A method of argumentation where a proposition is disproven by demonstrating that following its logical consequences leads to absurd or contradictory outcomes

Question 15

Who employed the technique of Reductio ad Absurdum to present counterexamples of the ontological argument?

Answer 15

Gaunilo of Marmoutiers

Question 16

Who is Gaunilo of Marmoutiers?

Answer 16

A Benedictine monk

Question 17

In what work did Gaunilo challenge the ontological argument?

Answer 17

Behalf of the Fool

Question 18

Gaunilo thought that the human intellect is only able to comprehend information provided by the senses – what is Gaunilo?

Answer 18

Gaunilo is an empiricist

Question 19

Summarise “Behalf of the Fool”

Answer 19

Gaunilo contends that the ontological argument fails because logic of the same kind would force one to conclude many things exist which certainly do not

Question 20

What example does Gaunilo use in “Behalf of the Fool” to disprove Anselm

Answer 20

The Perfect Island

Question 21

The Perfect Island

Answer 21

Gaunilo claims that one can prove the existence of a perfect island by using the same argument that Anselm uses to prove the existence of God

To use the same reasoning to prove the existence of a perfect island based on its conceptual perfection would lead to unreasonable or absurd conclusions

Question 22

What scripture does Anselm refer to?

Answer 22

“The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God”

                             – Psalm 14

Question 23

Gaunilo concludes that…
(quote)

Answer 23

“So much for the assertion that this supreme nature already is in my understanding”

Question 24

“So much for the assertion that this supreme nature already is in my understanding” – meaning

Answer 24

Gaunilo even doubts that we can understand this idea of the greatest conceivable being

Question 25

Who is Immanuel Kant?

Answer 25

Immanuel Kant was a German philosopher and one of the central Enlightenment thinkers

Question 26

Synthetic A Priori

Answer 26

Kant argues that the ontological argument relies on synthetic a priori reasoning

He considers this problematic because it attempts to establish the existence of God solely through conceptual analysis without empirical evidence

Question 27

Existence as a Predicate

Answer 27

Kant rejects the idea that existence can be treated as a predicate or quality of an object – maintaining that existence is not a defining characteristic but rather a necessary condition for any predicates to be attributed to an object

Question 28

What example did Kant use to further substantiate his point that existence is not a predicate?

Answer 28

Thalers (the Prussian currency of his day)

– Imagine 100 Thalers
– Saying that the Thalers exist tells us nothing more about them
– Saying that they are round and metallic adds to our concept of the Thalers
– There is no difference between our concept of 100 Thalers and our
concept of 100 Thalers that exist

Question 29

Confusing Logical and Real Existence (Kant)

Answer 29

Kant suggests that the ontological argument conflates the logical concept of existence with actual or real existence – making the unwarranted leap from conceptual necessity to ontological existence

Question 30

Critique of Pure Reason (Kant)

Answer 30

The ontological argument commits the fallacy of circular reasoning by assuming the existence of God to prove the existence of God – which is logically flawed

Question 31

Limited Applicability (Kant)

Answer 31

The ontological argument is limited to those who accept the concept of God as a necessary being

It does not provide a persuasive or universally compelling proof for the existence of God to those who do not already hold such a belief