Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

RS > Ontological argument > Flashcards

Ontological argument Flashcards

1
Q

What is the basic ontological argument?

A

P1: God is that than which nothing greater can be conceived (imagined)
P2: That than which nothing greater conceived must exist
Conclusion: Therefore, God must exist

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

What type of proof is the ontological argument?

A

A priori

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

What is the purpose of proof?

A

1) To provide a complete explanation
2) They appeal to reason, logic and evidence to support a view or an argument
3) To give meaning to phenomena- theists will interpret certain evidence in terms of God rather than anything else

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

What is an analytic statement?

A

True by definition. In other words, the conclusion of the proof is contained within the premise. E.g. Roses are flowers

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

What is an synthetic statement?

A

A proposition where the predicate is attached to the subject but not contained within it. In other words, the conclusion is not contained within the premise. E.g. Lawyers are wise.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

What is a predicate?

A

What is said about the subject. A quality or property of an object or subject. E.g. The boy kicks the ball

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

What is a priori?

A

Independent on experience

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

What is a posteriori?

A

Dependent on experience

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Strengths of a priori arguments

A
  • Logically necessary conclusions- provided the premises are analytically true
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Weaknesses of a priori arguments

A
  • Leads to only apparently logically necessary conclusions
  • Depends on whether we accept the premise are analytically true
  • Can only say that IF there is a God, we might be able to make certain claims about him, since we do not know that God exists or what God is like
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Strengths of a posteriori arguments

A
  • Uses evidence based on experience

- Empirical evidence is open to different interpretations

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Weaknesses of a posteriori arguments

A
  • Reliability of experience
  • Relies on accepting the nature of the evidence
  • Demands overwhelming good reasons for accepting that the conclusion is the most likely
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

What does ontological mean?

A

Concerned with ‘being’ or ‘existence’ e.g. God’s being

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

How is the ontological argument differ from all the other classical arguments for the existence of God?

A

Ontological argument is a priori argument whilst the rest are a posteriori.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

What is Anselm First Form argument (Proslogion Ch.2)?

A
  1. God is the greatest possible being
    2) If God exists in the mind alone, then a greater being could be imagined to exist both in mind and in reality
    3) This being would then be greater than God
    4) Thus God cannot exist only as an idea in the mind
    5) Therefore God exists both in the mind (in intellectu) and in reality (de re)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Why does Anselm argues that God’s existence is logically necessary (de dicto) in the above argument?

A

It is self contradictory to be able to imagine God as the greatest possible being and yet deny that he exists. Existence is a predicate making “God exists” analytic.

17
Q

Key strengths of Anselm argument above

A

1) A priori leads to a logically necessary conclusion
2) Descartes supports the ontological argument
3) Believes God is more than imagination

18
Q

Key weaknesses of Anselm argument above

A

1) Lacks empirical proof
2) No evidence or experience provided
3) What does it mean by existing in reality and mind?- too vague
4) God is not an object of proof- faith does not rely on evidence - Kant
5) Circular argument
6) It would be contradictory to claim that God is the greatest possible being

19
Q

What does “I do not seek to understand so that I may believe, but I believe in order to understand”- Anselm?

A
  • Putting his faith in order to understand

- Anselm never doubted the experience of God; uses reason to justify a belief

20
Q

What is Gaunilo criticism of Anselm’s 1st Form argument?

A
  • Defends on Behalf on the Fool
  • He believed in God but rejected Anselm’s deductive argument because we cam use it to define anything in the existence, provided it has the property of being the ‘greatest’ or most “excellent”
  • God’s real existence is doubtful without further existence (empirical proof)
  • Uses the Island Analogy
21
Q

What is the Island Analogy?

A

Imagine a perfect island but in reality it doesn’t exist. This means that not always your imagination can be in reality.

22
Q

Gaunilo’s argument conclusion

A

1) One can have a concept of God but you cannot move from concept to reality
2) Cannot define a concept into existence- you need empirical proof

23
Q

What is Anselm’s 2nd form (Proslogion, Chapter 3)?

A

1) God is the greatest being imaginable
2) It is greater to be a necessary being cannot be than a contingent being (can cease to exist)
3) If God exists only as a contingent being, he can be imagined not to exist, then a greater being could be imagined that cannot not exist
4) This being would be greater than God
5) Therefore, God is a necessary being and must exist in reality ( de re necessary being)

24
Q

Strengths of Anselm’s argument above

A

For those theists e.g. Anselm & Descartes who believe that existence is a necessary attribute God. Existence is a predicate

25
Q

Weaknesses of Anselm’s argument above

A
  • Existence is NOT a predicate
  • The concept of a necessary being still lacks empirical proof- still only a concept
  • Cannot prove God- Kant
26
Q

Background details on Descartes argument

A

1) God has stamped the idea of God into every person
2) The truth of God’s existence, like the truth of mathematics cannot be doubted once it has been clearly demonstrated
3) Demonstrating God’s existence is not about proving God exists but showing that there is no reason to doubt his existence

27
Q

What is Descartes version of the ontological argument?

A

1) God is perfect (part of God’s nature)
2) Existence is a necessary attribute of perfection ( a predicate of God)
3) Therefore, God exists
“God is perfect” is analytic- a logically necessary truth

28
Q

What is Descartes Triangle analogy?

A

“Triangle analogy”- logically necessary that every triangle must have 3 side and 3 angles

29
Q

What is Descartes mountain analogy?

A

Logically necessary that every mountain must have a valley

30
Q

What is Kant objection to Descartes argument?

A
  • Existence is not a predicate
  • Agrees by triangle by definition. However, a triangle is a concept
  • No contradiction in rejecting the WHOLE CONCEPT OF A TRIANGLE
  • A triangle is nothing but a idea
31
Q

What is Kant objections to the ontological argument?

A

1) God’s existence is NOT logically necessary
2) Existence is not a predicate
3) A triangle is only a mathematical concept and can be rejected (in response to Descartes argument)

32
Q

God’s existence is NOT logically necessary- KANT

A
  • The only sort of necessity is in found in grammar or in mathematics. No necessary propositions about existence
  • What is logically possible may not be onto-logically possible (exist outside the mind)
  • Does not mean there are any triangles or any unicorns (in actuality)
33
Q

Existence is not a predicate- KANT

A
  • The word “exists” does not tell us what an object is like- does not add anything to the concept (not a predicate)
  • A concept is NOT made any greater by adding the word “exists”
  • E.g. the concept of a £100 is not made any greater by adding the word exists, since is is only a concept in the mind
    All statements to do with existence have to be treated synthetically
34
Q

What is Hume’s objection?

A

We cannot define something into existence. No matter how much we define a concept we must seek external evidence to prove that it exists

35
Q

What is Aquinas objection to the ontological argument ?

A

1) Impossible to know God’s nature
2) Existence needs to be treated synthetically
3) God’s existence must be proven empirically

RS (22 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2025 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions