The Ontological Argument Flashcards
What kind of proof is the ontological argument
A deductive proof
And a priori because it draws a conclusion through reason
For the OA, God exists by..
Definition
Two scholars of the ontological argument
St Anselm of Canterbury
Rene Descartes
What is Anselm’s definition of God
God is the greatest and best being we can conceive of
Why does God have to exist for Anselm
It is better to exist in reality than only in the mind
God has to exist because if he only existed in our imaginations it would be possible to imagine a greater being (one that existed in reality) which would be God
The idea of a greatest being necessitates the existence of such a being otherwise it would not be the greatest at all
Anselm quote on God
‘You exist so truly Lord that you cannot be thought not to exist’
5 points of Anselm
God is that than which nothing greater can be conceived
According to Anselm even ‘the fool’ has an idea og God in his head
So we have a concept of God in our mind
If God only existed in our mind we could imagine a greater one (one that exists)
So the greatest conceivable being exists in the mind and reality too
Reductio ad absurdum
In logic - an argument which tries to disprove a statement by showing it inevitable leads to ridiculous or absurd conclusions
Anselms arguments about necessary things
God is that than which nothing greater can be conceived
Necessary things are greater than contingent things
This means God is necessary
Gaunilo’s criticism number 1
The ‘fool’ may make up all kinds of things in his head - like gossip - so how can we tell what is true?
Gaunilo’s criticism number 2
You cannot define things into existence
Gaunilo’s criticism number 3
The perfect island
Reduction ad absurdum can define anything into existence
The perfect island is ‘lost’ but the greatest conceivable islands
This means it MUST exist
Criticisms of the perfect island
There is no maximum amount of trees, delicacies, and riches for an island to have
So it is always possible to imagine a greater island
The idea of a ‘perfect island’ is incoherent
Kant criticism of the OA number 1
Saying ‘and it exists’ tells us nothing new
Him existing doesn’t deepen our understanding of God
We can assume God exists but simply saying ‘and he exists’ is not a predicate for Kant
Kant criticism of the OA number 2
Saying ‘God does not exist’ us not a contradiction
Rejecting the predicate but not the subject is contradictory
Eg accepting triangles but rejecting the predicate that a triangle has three sides
But the rejection of God is a rejection of both subject and predicate so it is not contradictory
