Ontological Argument Flashcards
What is Anselm’s ontological argument in simple terms?
Anselm says that God, by definition, is the greatest being we can imagine. And if this greatest being only existed in our minds, it wouldn’t be the greatest. So, for God to truly be the greatest, He must exist in reality.
How does Descartes explain God’s existence in his ontological argument?
Descartes’ ontological argument asserts that the idea of a supremely perfect being (God) necessarily includes existence, as existence is a perfection. Since we have the idea of a perfect God, and perfection requires existence, God must exist.
What does Aquinas say about proving God’s existence through logic alone?
Aquinas argues that we can’t prove God’s existence just by thinking about Him. He says we need evidence from the real world (through our senses), not just logic or ideas.
Why does Aquinas think humans can’t fully understand God’s essence?
Aquinas believes that because of human sin (the “fall”), we can’t fully understand God’s true nature. Only God can truly know Himself.
How could we defend Anselm’s argument against Aquinas’ objection?
We can still have a basic idea of God’s greatness (like being all-powerful), and that’s enough for the argument to work.
What was Hume’s objection to the ontological argument?
Hume says that we can’t prove God’s existence just by thinking about it. Our knowledge should come from experience (what we see and observe), not just from logic or reasoning alone.
How does Hume use concepts like love and justice to argue his point?
Hume says we can understand ideas like love and justice through logic, even though we don’t see “love” or “justice” themselves. We see actions that show love or justice, but those ideas aren’t directly observable.
Why is “existence” not considered a predicate in Hume and Kant’s view?
Hume and Kant argue that existence isn’t a quality or feature of something. Saying something exists doesn’t tell you anything new about it. It just means you can find it in the real world.
What is Kant’s criticism of Descartes’ view on existence as a predicate?
Kant argues that existence isn’t a property. For example, you can describe your bank account as having millions of pounds, but that doesn’t make it true until you check it in reality. The same goes for God—just defining Him doesn’t prove He exists.
How does Kant use the example of a triangle to explain his criticism?
Kant says that just because a triangle must have three sides, you can’t say the same about God’s existence. Denying God’s existence doesn’t create a contradiction, because existence isn’t a necessary quality like the sides of a triangle.
What is Bertrand Russell’s argument against the ontological argument?
Russell argues that existence is not a predicate by using a simple example: if we say “Santa Claus is a man” and “men exist,” that doesn’t mean Santa Claus exists. Existence isn’t a property we can just add to a definition.
What is Leibniz’s principle of sufficient reason, and how can it be applied to the cosmological argument?
Leibniz’s principle states that everything must have a reason or cause for its existence. Applied to the cosmological argument, it suggests that the universe must have a sufficient reason for existing, which is God as the first cause.
What is one weakness of Aquinas’ cosmological argument, and is it detrimental to the argument?
A weakness is that it assumes everything in the universe requires a cause, but why can’t the universe itself be uncaused? This could undermine the argument by suggesting the need for a first cause might not be necessary.
How does the Kalam cosmological argument differ from Aquinas’ version, and what could cause the Kalam argument to collapse?
The Kalam argument argues that the universe must have had a beginning, making the idea of an infinite past impossible. It collapses if the idea of a “beginningless universe” is proven possible, like with quantum mechanics or other models of cosmology.
Why is Anselm’s ontological argument considered an a priori argument?
It is a priori because it doesn’t rely on empirical evidence or experience but on reasoning and the concept of God alone. Anselm believes faith precedes understanding, meaning you must have faith to understand the argument.
