Philosophy: Ontological Argument

Question 1

What does ontological mean?

Answer 1

Use of reason to conclude probable existence of God
A Priori argument

Question 2

What was the purpose of the ontological argument?

Answer 2

To defend faith, not to convert non-believers

Question 3

What date was the ontological argument put forward? Who by?

Answer 3

Anselm - (1225 - 1275)

Question 4

How does Anselm conclude that ‘God is that than which nothing greater can be conceived’?

Answer 4

We all have a shared sense of justice
The shared sense of justice must have come from outside our communities (otherwise it would not be the same)
Because we have the SAME sense of justice, it must have come from God
God must be all good
God must be that than which nothing greater can be conceived

Question 5

How does Anselm explain further his idea of justice?

Answer 5

• Justice must derive from a being which is all Good
• Justice is an idea in the mind of God and it is God that gives us the ability to know and understand justice.
• even an atheist can recognise that there is a common concept of justice, and therefore, they must also have a concept of where it comes from. It must come from a being that is

Question 6

What is Anselm’s first arguement?

Answer 6

P1: God is that than which nothing greater can be conceived
P2: It is greater to exist in reality than the mind alone
C: God exists

Question 7

What is Gaunilo’s criticism of Anselms first argument?

Answer 7

He says that Anselm effectively argues anything into existence. He gives the example:
P1: Imagine an island that is ‘that than which no greater Island can be conceived.’
P2: It is greater to exist in reality than the mind
C: This island must exist
But obviously this island doesn’t exist - Anselm’s argument is absurd

Question 8

What other criticism of Anselm does Gaunilo give?

Answer 8

Since no-one can know God, Anselm cannot begin with the predicate ‘a being which no greater can be conceived’, as no-one can truly conceive of God

Question 9

What are weaknesses of Gaunilo’s criticism?

Answer 9

• Islands can always be improved and bettered, whereas God is already the greatest he can be.
  Plantinga - ‘islands have no intrinsic maximum’
  Islands are physical whereas God is not

Question 10

What is Anselm’s second argument?

Answer 10

P1: God is that than which nothing greater can be conceived
P2: It is greater to be necessary than contingent
C: If God is that than which nothing greater can be conceived, God must be necessary

it is greater to be necessary because without the necessary being, nothing that is contingent would exist.

Question 11

What is Kant’s criticism of Anselms second argument?

Answer 11

You can not apply the term “necessary” to a being. It can only be applied to prepositions or analytical statements
—> e.g All unmarried men are bachelors, John is an unmarried man-conclusion-John is a Bachelor is necessary.

Question 12

What is Descartes Ontological argument?

Answer 12

P1: Existence is a predicate of perfection
P2: God is perfect
C: God must exist

Question 13

What are problems with P1 of Descartes?

Answer 13

• Whether existence is a predicate
• Existence in this universe can only be applied to objects with are contingent.
• is existence in the mind real?

Question 14

What are problems with P2 of Descartes?

Answer 14

• Inconsistent triad, God is not perfect
• Assumes there is a God, and you cannot use the conclusion of an argument in the premises

Question 15

Explain Kant’s criticism that ‘Existence is not a predicate’

Answer 15

Existence is not a characteristic of perfection. Existence does not tell us anything more about an object and therefore, it is not a predicate
—-> e.g If we say that a perfect house is made of stone, has windows, a door etc we learn about the house. If we then say that this house exists, this tells us nothing more about the qualities of the house. So existence is not a predicate of perfection.

Question 16

Explain Kant’s thalers example

Answer 16

Kant’s example of thalers: 100 real thalers have no more thalers in them than 100 imaginary thalers - the description is the same. So the existence of the thalers does not change the description of the thalers

Question 17

Explain Frege’s support for Kant

Answer 17

Existence is not a property or of perfection - it is not a property at all. He gives the following example:
1. The King’s carriage is drawn by four horses.
2. The King’s carriage is drawn by thoroughbred horses.
“thoroughbred” tells us something about the individual horses and so is a property. However, four does not tell us anything about an individual horse.
Numbers will only tell us something about an idea or concept, not of an object e.g. in statement 1 above we learn something about horse drawn carriages but we don’t learn anything about individual horses.

Question 18

What does Frege say about numbers?

Answer 18

Numbers can explain concepts, but not details
—> therefore, Existence does not describe properties of things, it doesn’t teach us anything about the thing, just states that it exists.

Frege then goes on to argue that the number 0 is the equivalent to non existence and one is the equivalent to existence. Therefore, existence is like numbers and as numbers are not properties, neither is existence.

Question 19

Kant’s criticisms about logic and reality

Answer 19

Just because something is logically true, it does not make it true in reality
—-> e.g All Queens are female monarchs. Elizabeth is a queen, therefore Elizabeth is a female monarch. This is logically true but to know if Elizabeth exists in reality, we would have to search through empirical evidence. This is the same for God. This is a flaw in the nature of the argument as a priori.

Question 20

What is Russell’s criticism of Anselm?

Answer 20

Anselm falls into the traps of syllogism, and misuses the word ‘exist’, as existence is not a predicate.
e.g. All men exist, Santa is a man, Santa exists

Question 21

Wittgenstein’s support for Anselm

Answer 21

Religious believers have their own language game - to them, the idea of a ‘necessary’ god makes sense, so Anselm can use the term.

Question 22

Explain Malcom’s Ontological argument

Answer 22

Malcom argued that if God exists, his necessity means being ‘non-dependent’ i.e. Nothing can cause his existence or cause it to cease, as God is non-dependent.
Therefore, if God exists, he must be necessary

Question 23

What are general issues with deductive arguments?

Answer 23

If you don’t agree to the premises, then you wont agree with the conclusion

Question 24

How does Brian Davies support Anselm?

Answer 24

£5 in my hand, existing is different to £5 in my mind because I can spend it, so existence is a characteristic/predicate.