The Ontological Arguement - Part A

Question 1

Introduction

Answer 1

• ‘Ontos’ Greek word meaning being/existence
• Apriori –> Based on definition
• Analytic –> Uses definitions
• Deductive –> If conclusion is true, it must be true

Question 2

Anselms’ Arguement

Answer 2

• Supports the Ontological arguement
• God is that which nothing greater can be conceived/ thought of
• 2 Proslogians (prayers)
• Prosligian 2
• Proslogian 3

Question 3

Proslogian 2

Answer 3

P1) God is that which nothing greater can be conceived
P2) It is better to exist in reality (re) than in the mind (intelectu)
P3) God must exist in the mind and in reality is he is the greatest being
C) God must exist in the mind and in reality

Question 4

Proslogian 3

Answer 4

P1) It is better to exist necessarily (be needed) than contingent ( dependent on others)
P2) Its better to have necessary existence
P3) God is the greatest thing that can be conceived and must and therefore must exist.
C) God necessarily exists.

Question 5

Gualions’ Counter Arguement

Answer 5

• You can not define things into existence
• If you replace ‘God’ with ‘Lost Island’ this would prove that the lost island exits even though we know that it doesn’t
• This makes Anselms’ arguement valid, but not sound

Question 6

Anselms reply

Answer 6

• Intrinsic Maximum - God has this but the island does not
• This is because you can not add anything to God to make him better, because he is the greatest thing that can be conceived, however you can add things to the lost island to improve it
• Therefore God can not be compared to the Lost Island

Question 7

Plantingas Arguement

Answer 7

• Possible worlds to make a modal arguement
  P1) There is a possible world where there is a maximal and excellent being
  P2) If a maximally great and excellent being exists in one world, it must be possible to exist in all worlds
  P3) Our world is a possible world
  C) God must exist in our possible world