St. Anselm of Canterbury's Ontological Argument Flashcards
What is St. Anselm of Canterbury’s (1033-1109) Ontological Argument?
An ontological argument attempts to prove the existence of God from relfection on the very idea of God.
What does St. Anselm of Canterbury’s (1033-1109) Ontological Argument appeal to?
a priori premises.
What does it mean that something exist in understanding?
We understand a being or object enough to be able to deny or accept its existence.
What does it mean that exist in reality?
That we both understand a being or object to deny or accept its existence, and have observed it existence thereby accepting it.
What was St. Anslems strategy/base argument?
if one claims to understand God, then one also automatically claims that he exists.
What key notion does St. Anslems use to acheive this?
The key notion that claims “That than which nothing greater can be conceived” is god, which essentially can translated to ‘the greatest conceivable being’.
What types of great exists?
1) Great can = ‘worthy qualities of positive value: knowledge, benevolence, power - aka the properties of God
2) Great can = ‘ontological perfection - existing in reality is greater than not existing in reality
Breakdown St. Anslems arugment!
P1: God is “That than which nothing greater can be conceived”, aka the greatest conceivable being
P2: There cannot exist a greater being than the greatest conceivable being
P3: Existing in reality is ‘greater’ than existing in understanding
Thereby,
C: If “That than which nothing greater can be conceived” exist only in understanding then it must exist in reality as well, since it is “That than which nothing greater can be conceived”.
What does St. Anslem use to make his argument?
A reductio ad absurdum (RAA)
What is a reductio ad absurdum (RAA)
a technique of arguing whereby you being by supposing that the conclusion you want to argue for is false, you from that derive contradiction form that supposition.
If this contradiction then leads to the supposition can’t possibly be true, then you can conclude that the supposition isn’t true. From this you can conclude that the original position you wished to argue is true.
