Ontological Argument

Question 1

Is the argument a priori or a posterior I

Answer 1

A priori - without it prior to evidence or experience

Question 2

What type of proof is the ontological argument

Answer 2

Deductive proof - argument for the existence of god based on the concept of the nature being

Question 3

What is an ontological argument

Answer 3

Argument for the existence of god based on the concept of the nature of being

Question 4

Who came up with part of the ontological argument

Answer 4

Anslem - archbishop

Question 5

What was anslems book called

Answer 5

Proslogion

Question 6

Who did anslem believe was a fool

Answer 6

Atheists - someone who denies all existence of god

Question 7

why did anslem say god existed

Answer 7

in his prosologion 2 anslem said that if we accept the definition of god as being the greatest being that definition must involve him actually existing

Question 8

why did anselm carry on to say god existed

Answer 8

he said that it is impossible to exist in the mind and to exist in reality but that the t wo ideas are not mutually inclusive . however because god is the greatest possible beig he has too live in both mind and reality or he wouldnt be the greatest possible being.

Question 9

the premises and conclusion in simple terms

Answer 9

p: beings exist in both the mind and in reality
p: god i sthe greatest possible being thta can be thought of
c: in order to be the greatest thing that can be thought of, god must exist in both mind and reality.

Question 10

what is the example of a painter

Answer 10

before a painting can be relaity the painter needs to have an idea that a painting exists

Question 11

why did anslem say that god has necessary existence .

Answer 11

because if god is the greatest possibel being to ever be concieved then he must exist in relity and not just an idea. this is because otherwise anything that existed in reality would be greater than god but because of our definition of god being the greatest possible being then it follows that he must necessarily exist

Question 12

extened verison of the premise and conclusion

Answer 12

p: god is the greatest possible bieng
p: if god exists in the mind alone then a greater being can be imagined to exist both in the mind and relaity
p: this being woudl then be greater than god
p: thus god cannot exist only as an idea in the mind
c: therefore,god exists both in the mind and reality

Question 13

who is rene decartes

Answer 13

a rantionalist philospher
talked in 1596-1650
a thinker not a senser
doubted everything he knew
non relgious
he has a book called meditations

Question 14

what was decartes definition of god?

Answer 14

a supermly perfect being and tried to prove gods existence from this.
This means that god possess all of the characteristics and best attributes

Question 15

what was decartes argument

Answer 15

Normally, we can talk about what a thing is (its essence) without knowing whether or not it exists - the unicorn and its existence are two separate ideas.
- so you can consider a thing’s essence as separate from its existence. we can do this, because things are contingent - they may or may not exist, so talking about
“their existence as a separate feature, makes sense - although not as a predicate (Kant).
- But Descartes says, you cannot do this in the case of God:
* as a supremely perfect being, non-existence is not a possibility for God, because it is a perfection, that he must have.
* so God’s existence is not separable from his essence: it is part of its perfection
- Just as you are unable to separate ideas about mountains from the existence of valleys
- Just as you are unable to separate ideas about 3-sided shapes from triangles
For God to be God (essence) is for him necessarily to be (existence) - and this kind of existing, is correctly described as an essential aspect of his being.

Question 16

What did decartes mediatation 3 say

Answer 16

Meditation 3
P • I exist
P • In my mind, I have the concept of a supremely perfect being.
P. As an imperfect being, I could not have conjured up the concept of a supremely perfect being.
P • The concept of a supremely perfect being must therefore have originated from the supremely perfect being itself.
? • A supremely perfect being must exist in order to be perfect.
C • Therefore, a supremely perfect
being exists.

Question 17

What did meditation 5

Answer 17

• Existence is one of God’s many perfections
• This is not based on an arbitrary definition of God, but the innate idea of God that people possess
• God’s necessary existence is contained within our understanding of God as a ‘supremely perfect being’
• Because God.is a supremely perfect being he possesses all perfections
• This perfect state includes existence, which is a perfection in itself. Existence is a predicate of a perfect being
• Therefore, God exists

Question 18

What is Descartes argument in simple

Answer 18

• Existence is one of God’s many perfections
• This is not based on an arbitrary definition of God, but the innate idea of God that people possess
• God’s necessary existence is contained within our understanding of God as a ‘supremely perfect being’
• Because God is a supremely perfect being he possesses all
perfections
• This perfect state includes existence, which is a perfection in itself.
Existence is a predicate of a perfect being
• Therefore God exists

Question 19

Why did decanted use mountains and valleys as an an analogy

Answer 19

Descartes makes use of is the idea that one cannot think of a mountain without thinking of the corresponding valley - for wherever there is one there is always, by definition, the other. This analogy is used by Descartes to reinforce the idea that it is impossible to divorce the ideas of God and the idea of his existence:
….for from the fact that I cannot conceive a mountain without a valley, it does not follow that there is any mountain or any valley in existence, but only that the mountain and the valley, whether they exist or do not exist, cannot in any way be separated one from the other. While from the fact that I cannot conceive God without existence, it follows that existence is inseparable from Him, and hence that He really exists; not that my thought can bring this to pass, or impose any necessity on things, but, on the contrary, because the necessity which lies in the thing itself, i.e. the necessity of the existence of God determines me to think in this way. For it is not within my power to think of God without existence (that is of a supremely perfect Being devoid of a supreme perfection).
Descartes is stating that God alone possesses this perfection (that is, of necessary existence) as the supremely perfect being, thereby proving that God, necessarily, exists.

Question 20

Why did decorates anaololgy of a triangle

Answer 20

Descartes points out that to think of a triangle is to necessarily think of a shape that has both three sides and interior angles that add up to 180°. It does not necessarily mean that this shape necessarily exists in any external reality but in order to think about the idea of a triangle there needs to be a set of criteria that can be understood by all and which forms part of the definition of what a triangle is.
Similarly with God: it is equally impossible to think of God unless one considers the attribute of existence as a necessary part of the definition of what God is. In summary - Descartes says the concept of God contains the idea of his existence as a necessary perfection that he possesses in the same way that the concept of a triangle refers to a shape with three sides and interior angles that add up to 180°.
The attributes and the idea are inextricably linked in both cases.

Question 21

What is a predicate

Answer 21

Something that adds to the property of a subject ]
Every complete sentcance contains a subject and a predicate

Question 22

What is Descartes argument in simple terms

Answer 22

Concept of God: Descartes starts with the idea of God as a perfect being, which includes all perfections.
Existence as Perfection: He argues that existence is a perfection. A being that does not exist cannot be perfect because existence is a necessary part of perfection.
God Must Exist: Therefore, if we have the concept of a perfect being (God), this being must exist because a perfect being lacking existence would not truly be perfect.
In other words, Descartes’ argument suggests that the very definition of God as a perfect being implies that God must exist, because non-existence would be an imperfection.

Question 23

What is normal Malcom’s ontological theotry

Answer 23

Gods existence as necessary rather than just possible

Question 24

Does Malcom disagree with decorate and anslems theory or does he agree

Answer 24

Anslem and decartes argument argue that existence is a predicate/ perfection of god, which malcom rejects this and agrees with Kant and gaunilio that to assert that god exists because it is greater to exist in reality of because existence is a perfection is false.
You cant simply add the concept of existence to a list of qualities and then argue that that’s that.
However, he agrees with Anselm’s argument in Proslogion 3 that necessary existence is a necessary consequence of being the
“greatest conceivable being”, because a being that did not have necessary existence would be inferior to one that did
* As both can be conceived with necessary existence the greater, that greatest possible being (with necessary existence) must exist
* Malcolm uses the term “unlimited being” - all perfections to the greatest possible degree

Question 25

What are Malcom’s three possibilities

Answer 25

God’s Existence is Impossible: If the concept of God is self-contradictory or logically incoherent, then God’s existence is impossible. In this case, God cannot exist in any possible world.

God’s Existence is Contingent: If God exists contingently, then God might exist in some possible worlds but not in others. However, this contradicts the traditional concept of God as a necessary being, whose existence does not depend on anything else.

God’s Existence is Necessary: If the concept of God is coherent and logically possible, then God must exist necessarily. This means that if God’s existence is possible, then God exists in all possible worlds, including the actual world. A necessary being, by definition, cannot fail to exist.

Malcom agreed that gods existence is necessary

Question 26

What is Malcom’s response to Kant

Answer 26

• Agrees that contingent existence is not a predicate but argues that Kant does not PROVE that necessary existence is NOT a predicate
• Kiterent shen the elaini God “ists nees it Melcause that inpacks the
concept of God
* Kant accepts that “if God exists, he exists necessarily” but this doesn’t mean that God exists - possible that God doesn’t exist
* Malcolm responds that this is confused because if we accept that “God necessarily exists” is an analytic truth derived from our concept of God, then this rules out the possibility that God doesn’t exist
* “God doesn’t exist” is necessarily false/ absurd
* Malcolm is arguing that necessary existence is a predicate of God

Question 27

Did gaunillo agree or disagree with anslem

Answer 27

Disagree fully

Question 28

What did gaunilo say and use the island analogy for

Answer 28

Now if someone should tell me that there is such an island, I should easily understand his words, in which there is no difficulty. But suppose that he went on to say, as if by a logical inference: “You can no longer doubt that this island which is more excellent than all lands exists somewhere, since you have no doubt that it is in your understanding.
And since it is more excellent not to be in the understanding alone, but to exist both in the understanding and in reality, for this reason it must exist. For if it does not exist, any land which really exists will be more excellent than it; and so the island already understood by you to be more excellent will not be more excellent.’

Question 29

Why did gaunilo reject the definition of the greatest possible being theory

Answer 29

Because if that’s true than anything we consider perfect could come true like an island

Question 30

What is gaunilo saying is a flaw

Answer 30

That you cant just imagine something into existence just because it is the greatest thing we can think of - just because you can define a greatest possible being doesn’t automatically lead to the fact that one actually exists and it here that he makes use of his island anaology to underline the absurdity of anslems argument

Flaw in the Argument: Gaunilo’s critique suggests that Anselm’s argument improperly moves from the conceptual realm (the idea of God or the perfect island) to the real world (actual existence). He implies that existence cannot be simply derived from a definition.

Question 31

A summary of gaunilos theory

Answer 31

In summary, Gaunilo rejects the ontological argument by demonstrating that if Anselm’s logic were valid, it could be used to prove the existence of any perfect entity (like a perfect island), which is clearly not reasonable. This highlights a potential flaw in claiming that the mere definition of something as perfect entails its existence in reality.

Question 32

How does Kant challenge decartes

Answer 32

Kant said that existence could not be a predicate simply because existence can be a thing that an object can possess or lack but it does not describe anything about the nature of an object

For example - god is all loving is a predicate because it adds somethingt too the subject
Saying something exists doesn’t add anything to the subject so it cant. Be true

Question 33

How does Kant use the exammple of thatchers ions

Answer 33

Example of Thalers: To illustrate his point, Kant uses the example of thalers (a type of coin). He explains that there is no difference in the concept of 100 thalers whether they are conceived of as existing or not. The concept of 100 thalers remains the same whether or not they actually exist in reality. Adding existence to the concept of 100 thalers does not change the concept itself.

Question 34

How does Kant show that the concept of god is wrong in anslems argument

Answer 34

Kant asserts that even if we have a concept of God as the greatest conceivable being, this concept does not imply actual existence. To say that God exists does not add anything to the concept of God itself; it merely posits the actualization of the concept in reality.

Question 35

A summary of Kent’s argument

Answer 35

In summary, Kant challenges the ontological argument by asserting that existence is not a predicate that can be used to define a being’s greatness or perfection. Therefore, the ontological argument’s logical leap from the concept of a perfect being to the existence of that being is flawed. This undermines the argument’s claim that God’s existence can be derived purely from the definition of God as the greatest conceivable being.