P : The Ontological Argument Knowledge

Question 1

Define God.

Answer 1

Than that which nothing greater can exist. (TTWNGCE)

Question 2

Define Aseity.

Answer 2

The property of self existence, by which a being exists in and itself or from itself.

Question 3

Define Ontology.

Answer 3

The argument which only works for necessary beings.

Question 4

What does Anselm state about our reality and our imaginations?

Answer 4

Anselm states that things that exist in reality are always better than things that exist in our imagination.

Question 5

What is Anselms’ main argument?

Answer 5

If God existed only in our imaginations he wouldn’t be “ than that which nothing greater can be conceived”, because things that exist in reality are better than things that existed in our minds.

Question 6

What does Anselm argue about atheists?

Answer 6

An atheist is someone who either doesn’t understand the definition of God or is not willing to listen to the logic to understand God. Therefore they are fool.

Question 7

What type of argument is the Ontological argument? Why?

Answer 7

Am ‘a priori’ as it seeks to prove the existence of God from the definition of God. Anselm uses logic (saying it is self evident) rather than depending on evidence=deductive.

Question 8

What analogy’s have been made to prove Anselm’s point?

Answer 8

What would be greater than a huge pile of money in your mind or a huge pile of money that exists in front of you?

Question 9

What is the example of a painting?

Answer 9

If an artist has the intention to paint a picture it will exist in their imagination, but when it is painted it exists in the artists reality too.

Question 10

What is reduction ad absurdum?

Answer 10

Suppose God only exists in one’s understanding. Then God could be greater by existing in reality. This means a greater God is possible. Anselm has faith in the existence of God and through logic has demonstrated that the opposite opinion, that God does not exist would be absurd.

Question 11

Quote from the Book of Psalms.

Answer 11

‘ The fool has said in his heart, “there is no God”’

Question 12

What are atheists referred to as?

Answer 12

Irreconcilable contradiction.

Question 13

Who is Gaunilo?

Answer 13

• A theologian & monk
• Believes that logic alone doesn’t prove the existence of God.

Question 14

Explain the Parody of The Idea of a perfect Island.

Answer 14

Gaunilo states that “ the perfect lost island” is one in which nothing greater can be conceived. He argued Anselm’s argument would lead to absurd conclusions if applied to anything else, as one could define anything into existence.

Question 15

What quote did Gaunilo use to support his ‘perfect island’ Parody?

Answer 15

“They say that there is an island in the ocean somewhere which cannot be found and has therefore been called the ‘lost island’ “.

Question 16

What were the two points Anselm raised in his Second argument, objecting Gaunilo’s objection?

Answer 16

• It is impossible to define the perfect island.
• Islands are contingent, God is necessary.

Question 17

Explain Anselm’s point to which it is impossible to define the perfect island?

Answer 17

He argues that the perfect island having 200 Palm trees is limiting, how may trees must the perfect island have? If you’ve decided on a number and then change your mind and add one more, would the island still be perfect? He argues it is impossible to define the perfect island but we have agreed to the definition of God— even fools agree to this.

Question 18

Explain Anselm’s point that Islands are contingent, God is necessary.

Answer 18

Anselm stressed that the nature of his ontological argument was only intended to apply to God. Gaunilo seems to have missed the point as what is a beautiful palm tree today will once rot and die but God is necessary and will exist internally.

Question 19

What is Gaunilos final objection to Anselm? Example?

Answer 19

Argues that no one actually understands the nature of God, even though we may think we do. He uses the example of hearing of a man whom he has no personal acquaintance. Gaunilo believes humans can understand the concept of God but it does not follow to know exactly what he is like.

Question 20

What is Rene Descartes Ontological argument?

Answer 20

Just as you can’t have the essence of a triangle without three sides and two right angles, you can’t have God without supremacy. It is just as much of a contradiction to think of God (a supreme being) lacking existence (lacking perfection).

Question 21

How does Descarte define God.

Answer 21

A supremely perfect being.

Question 22

What Quote supports Descartes Ontological Argument? (highlands/lowlands)

Answer 22

“If I think of highlands in a world where there are no lowlands it is self contradictory”.

Question 23

What Quote supports Descartes argument? (Triangle Comparison)

Answer 23

“…it is quite evident that existence can no more be separated from the essence of God than the fact that its three angles equal two right angles can be separated from the essence of a triangle”

Question 24

What is Kants first Objection to Descartes Argument?

Answer 24

Existence is not a real predicate, because it adds nothing to the concept of God.
Kant argues that we must begin with the experiences of the senses then reach for logic to emphasise the argument.

Question 25

Explain Kants example of Thalers.

Answer 25

If you say ‘Oh by the way Thalers exist’, this gives no new concept of Thalers. The only way we can prove Thalers exist is by experiencing them (e.g. touching, feeling, smelling or tasting them).

Question 26

What is Kants Second Objection of the Ontological Argument?

Answer 26

“If” there is an infinitely perfect being than he must exist just as “if” there is a triangle it must have three sides. Who is to say that there is a God or is a triangle.

Question 27

Explain Kants example of Unicorns.

Answer 27

“A unicorn is a horse with a horn” , this is analytically true because that’s how we define unicorn, but it does not prove that unicorns really exist. Just as “God existing Necessarily” is logically true because that is included in Anselms definition of God (TTWNGCBC), but it does not follow that God is actually true.

Question 28

What is a Predicate?

Answer 28

To affirm or assert something.

Question 29

Explain the FIRST strength of the Ontological argument? ( deductive )

Answer 29

It is a deductive argument, so if it succeeds it is proof of the existence of God. It doesn’t depend on observation, since human observation isn’t always correct. No ambiguity— the argument either succeeds or fails by logic, unlike the design argument which probably proves the existence of God.

Question 30

What is a SECOND strength of the Ontological argument? (Theism)

Answer 30

The Argument supports religious faith and deepens their understanding of God, in theism.

Question 31

What is a THIRD strength of the Ontological argument? (existence).

Answer 31

We all have an understanding of God and that concept cannot be separated from the existence of God.

Question 32

What is a FOURTH strength of the Ontological argument?

Answer 32

Anselm is writing from faith seeking understanding. He is exploring the theological claims of his faith, not necessarily trying to prove the existence of God in reality.

Question 33

What is the FIRST weakness of the Ontological argument? (Predicate)

Answer 33

Existence is not predicate; to say something exists doesn’t add any new information to the subject that we didn’t already know. It just confirms the believe in the thing. E.g “ cows exist”. You must experience the thing through your senses before affirming belief.

Question 34

What is a SECOND weakness for the existence of God? (Existing necessarily).

Answer 34

You cannot make an existence claim on the definition of something because who’s to say that God exists in reality.

Question 35

What is the THIRD weakness of the Ontological argument?

Answer 35

There may be disagreement over the definition of God. “TTWNGCBC” Isn’t everyone’s definition of God.

Question 36

What is the THIRD weakness of the Ontological Argument?

Answer 36

People may have different definitions of God. “TTWNGCBC” is only one definition.

Question 37

What is a FOURTH weakness of the Ontological argument? (Human vs God)

Answer 37

Human minds are limited and God is not, so any attempt to define God would be trying to limit him which is something humans should not do.