The Existence of God - ontological argument

Question 1

The quote argument begins with

Answer 1

“and the fool hath said it in his heart there is no God”

Question 2

who proposed the first ontological argument

Answer 2

Anselm

Question 3

what is the premise of Anselms arguments

Answer 3

“god is the greatest being that can be conceived of”

Question 4

Latin word for in reality

Answer 4

de re

Question 5

Latin word for in the mind

Answer 5

de dicto

Question 6

Explain Anselm’s first ontological argument

Answer 6

God is the greatest being that can be conceived of
God at least exists in the mind
Things that exist in the mind alone are lesser than things that exist in reality
therefore, God must exist in reality for him to be the greatest possible thing

Question 7

what is an a priori argument?

Answer 7

An a priori argument is an argument which is derived from reason alone and does not depend on sense experience or observation as a premise. It is usually based instead on a definition or idea.

Question 8

what is deductive reasoning?

Answer 8

Deductive reasoning only uses logic and reasoning to arrive at a conclusion from the premise. The strength of deductive reasoning is that if the premise is true then the conclusion must be true, however, if the premise can be invalidated then this flaws the logic of the entire argument.

Question 9

what is an analytical statement?

Answer 9

statements that are true by definition

Question 10

what does reductio ad absurdum mean and how does anslem use it

Answer 10

reducing to absurdity. if we accept that God exists in the mind and things that are in the mind are lesser than those that exist in reality that would make a toothbrush better than God. This is absurd. and therefore the only logical non absurd conclusion is that he must exist in reality.

Question 11

what does reductio ad absurdum mean and how does anslem use it

Answer 11

reducing to absurdity. if we accept that God exists in the mind and things that are in the mind are lesser than those that exist in reality that would make a toothbrush better than God. This is absurd. and therefore, the only logical non absurd conclusion is that he must exist in reality.

Question 12

What is Anselm’s second argument?

Answer 12

God is the greatest being that can be conceived of
he postulates two states of being - a being you can image not existing (contingent) and a being you can not imagine not existing (necessary)
a being you can imagine not existing is lesser than a being you can not imagine not existing
therefore for God to be the most perfect being we mustn’t imagine him not existing so he must exist.

Question 13

what is the essential claim for anselm

Answer 13

Existence is a predicate of Gods ontos. Gods’ existence becomes self-evident in his being as existence is an essential quality for being the greatest being that can be conceived of.

we know God exists from reflection of his ontos

Question 14

What was Gaunilos arguments

Answer 14

A response to Anselm ‘on behalf of the fool’ - he asked to image a perfect island even if though it is the most perfect being we can think of that does not mean it exists to think this would be foolish
He used the example of gossip that can exist in the mind but not reality
He is trying to define things into existence

Question 15

Anselm’s response to Gaunilo

Answer 15

Gaunilo argued that God’s existence was necessary whereas an island’s existence is contingent. Therefore, you cannot compare the two. God’s necessary existence dictates that he cannot fail to exist, whereas an island can fail to exist (has a contingent existence). Anselm is essentially saying that Gaunilo commits a fallacy of composition (it is fallacious to compare an island to God as they are two intrinsically different types of being). There is no intrinsic maximum to the limits of the island but God is maximally great.

Question 16

Thomas Aquinas argument against Anselm

Answer 16

“Because we do not know the essence of God, the proposition is not self-evident to us; but needs to be demonstrated by things that are more known to us.” He supports arguments from observation (hence his teleological argument and cosmological arguments). He is pointing out that there is a certain level of arrogance in ontological arguments that claim to know the entirety of God. God is transcendent and ultimately a mystery, to claim he can be summed up in a sentence as ‘the greatest being that can be conceived of’ seems somewhat inappropriate.

Question 17

Clare Jarmys arguments

Answer 17

“The Achilles Heel of all ontological arguments, is the idea that it is not better to exist in reality than in the mind.”

Jarmy demonstrates this in 3 ways:

1. Nightmares: “I had a dream the other day that an enormous brown bear crashed through my sitting-room window. I was very pleased to wake up and discover that it was not true. It is clear that it is not always better to exist in reality.”
2. Moral/natural evils: “We might think that an imaginary disease or murder would be far better in the mind as being real does not make it better.”
3. Criticising Anselm’s use of the painter analogy: “We all have ideas of what our painting will be, and the reality rarely matches the idea.”

Question 18

what process does Descartes use to ascertain truth

Answer 18

cartesian doubt/methodological scepticism i doubt everything until you come to a conclusion about what cannot be doubted. He doubted his own existence until he concluded that ‘doubt requires a doubter’

Question 19

what did Descartes establishing his own existence mean?

Answer 19

It validifies the existence of anything in the mind. This means that things in the mind cannot be said to be nothing and thus God has a form of existence

Question 20

what did Descartes think about our innate belief in God

Answer 20

he thought every person had a natural belief in God due to a trademark left by a creator. We have a knowledge of God that is placed there by himself.

Question 21

what does Descartes mean by existence is a predicate of perfection

Answer 21

if something only exists in the mind (which we have established God does) this means it is no perfect. Therefore, it mut exist in reality to be perfect. Thus, existence is a property of perfection.

Question 22

what is Platingas argument

Answer 22

That is, that there exists a multiverse or parallel universes that exist alongside our own. In a multiverse of infinite ‘possible worlds’ there are an infinite number of possibilities, you may exist in a number of these universes perhaps in a slightly different form or circumstance. Plantinga uses such ideas to come up with the ‘Possible Worlds’ argument which uses theoretical physics to revive the ontological argument. The argument is as follows:
1. God is ‘that which no greater being can be conceived’

2. God’s existence is not impossible; God exists in some ‘possible world’
3. But it is greater to exist in all worlds, not just one.
4. Therefore, if God is that which no greater can be conceived of, then he must exist in all possible worlds (including our own).

Question 23

how does Kant criticise existence as a predicate (1)

Answer 23

• existence is not a real predicate
• we can discuss the properties of something to its existence is something else
• it would require empirical inspection to confirm its existence
• for example, we can imagine a trees roots, branches and leaves but to know its existence we must experience it in the real world
• This illustrates the need for observation and experience to define things into existence, we cannot deny things into existence via logic
• there is a difference between speaking of existence and conceptualising it

Question 24

evaluate Kants argument (1)

Answer 24

• Anselm wasnt trying to prove Gods existence but demonstrate his faith, Gods existence cannot be so easily understood
• Barth illustrated this further stating that the argument built a spiritual bridge for Christians to connect with God
• God should be a leap of faith not affirmed existence
• Tillich and symbols allowing connection to God
• arguably we can define things out of existence with logic - square circle - so we can define things out of existence
  -platinga ontologicl argument
• Guanlios island shows the absurdity of defining things into existence
• Humes argument wise man and maybe humes fork
• scientific age comte

Question 25

Kants argument about definitions of God (2)

Answer 25

• definitions of God are just concepts
• they are not verifiable and do not provide a level of existence
• Descartes even said that because God is an idea he cannot be said to be nothing and therefore exists
• for Kant this is not real existence
• Descartes and Anselm seemingly hold a platonic view of episteme and existence but this is improbable
• we cannot Go from a definition of God to existence

Question 26

Kants argument about necessary beings (3)

Answer 26

neccesary beings are a concept and cannot be verified
we do not have experience of them and cannot know they exist
theyre are a cupola of judgement - stray from our knowledge

Question 27

meaning of cupola of judgement

Answer 27

stray from our knowledge

Question 28

Evaluate kants arguments 2&3

Answer 28

• kant relies too much on observations - descartes this is flawed - reliance on impoverished empiricism
• positivist paradigm is due a shift to logic - thomas kuhn
• aquinas
• ayer verificaion principle and humes fork
• language games only meaningful to the individual