Ontological Argument

Question 1

What is Anselm’s ontological argument?

Answer 1

1. God is the greatest being - that which nothing greater can be conceived.
2. It is greater to exist in both the mind and reality.
3. In order for God to be the greatest possible being, God must be able to exist in both the mind and reality.
4. Therefore, God must exist both in the mind and reality.

Question 2

What is Gaunilo’s counter to Anselm’s first ontological argument (Gaunilo’s island)?

Answer 2

1. We can imagine an island which is the greatest possible island.
2. It is greater to exist in reality than in understanding.
3. Therefore this island must exist in order to be the greatest island.
   (However we know this doesn’t necessarily mean the island exists, likewise with God.)

Question 3

What is Anselm’s response to Gaunilo’s counter?

Answer 3

An island is dependent on physical things, if it did not have these physical things like sand and palm trees, then it would not be an island.
However, God’s existence is not dependent on anything and so no variation in the universe could cause God to not exist.
God has an intrinsic maximum, an island does not.

Question 4

What is Descartes’ ontological argument?

Answer 4

1. God is a supremely perfect being.
2. A supremely perfect being contains all supreme perfections.
3. Existence is a supreme perfection.
4. Therefore, God, a supreme being, must exist.

Question 5

What is Kant’s first criticism to Descartes’ ontological argument?

Answer 5

We cannot separate the subject from the predicate but we can still deny the existence of both the subject and the predicate. Therefore, by describing god as existing, it tells us nothing about the world.

Question 6

What is Kant’s second criticism to Descartes’ ontological argument?

Answer 6

The existence of God is not a property. If I think of something as existing, that’s the same as thinking it doesn’t exist.
Think of 100 coins. I can say that they are gold, round, rusty etc. Which are predicates. If add ‘existence’ this adds nothing to the description.

Question 7

What is Malcom’s ontological argument?

Answer 7

Malcolm asks to think of four possibilities;
1. God’s existence is necessarily false (God’s properties are logically impossible)
2. God’s existence is contingently false (God’s properties are possible but it just so happens that there isn’t a God)
3. God’s existence is contingently true (God’s properties are possible and it just so happens that there is a God)
4. God’s existence is necessarily true (God’s properties are logically necessary)
2 and 3 cannot apply to God because God is the greatest possible being.
1 statements are logically impossible such as ‘the square is round’
Therefore God’s existence must be necessarily true (4)

Question 8

What is Plantinga’s ontological argument?

Answer 8

1. There are possible worlds where things could have been different.
2. Not all worlds are possible such as a world where squares are round - necessary truths such as ‘squares have 4 sides’ must exist in every possible world.
3. There must be a possible world where a maximally great/necessary being exists.
4. A maximally great being is capable of existing in every possible world.
5. Therefore, God exists.