The Ontological argument

Question 1

What is the ontological argument?

Answer 1

A deductive, a priori, and analytic argument for the existence of God based on empiricism

Question 2

What is the definition of an a priori argument?

Answer 2

An argument based reason before sense experience

Question 3

What is the definition of deductive?

Answer 3

An argument based on reason where if the premises are true then the conclusion is logically true

Question 4

What is the definition of analytic?

Answer 4

A statement that contains the truth needed to verify it within the statement itself

Question 5

What is Anselm’s definition of God?

Answer 5

“The being than which no greater can be conceived”

Question 6

What is Anselm’s first argument?

Answer 6

• God can be defined as “The being than which no greater can be conceived”
• This definition exists in the mind of the fool (an atheist) but not in reality
• However, it is better to exist in re than in intellectu
• Anselm uses the example of a painting which is more beautiful in re than in the painter’s mind
• If God only exists in the fool’s mind then a greater being could be conceived
• Therefore God must exist in re and in intellectu

Question 7

What is Anselm’s second argument?

Answer 7

• God can be defined as “The being than which no greater can be conceived”
• It is possible to conceive both contingent and necessary beings
• A necessary being is greater than a contingent being as it can’t fail to exist and doesn’t rely on anything for its existence
• Since God is the greatest conceivable being he must be necessary and therefore must exist

Question 8

What is a predicate?

Answer 8

A quality or property of an object/subject in a sentence

Question 9

What is Descartes argument?

Answer 9

He starts by saying that we cannot trust empiricism and that includes empirical evidence of God as he thought a malicious demon was deceiving him! He said all he could trust was “I think therefore I am” which leads him to make a prior argument about God. He defines God as “a supremely perfect being” and says “existence cannot be separated from the essence of God”. He uses the example of a triangle that cannot be separated from the predicate of having 3 sides or angles adding up to 180 degrees and a mountain that cannot be separated from the predicate of a mountain. He, therefore, concludes existence is a predicate of God.

Question 10

What is Gaunilo’s criticism of Anselm’s 1st argument?

Answer 10

In his book ‘On Behalf of the Fool’ he illustrates the absurdity of Anselm’s 1st argument using the example of the greatest conceivable island. This island must exist as it is better to exist in re than in intellectu alone and otherwise the grottiest island would be better because it actually exists. He says this is silly because you can’t think something into existence.

Question 11

How could have Anselm respond to Gaunlio’s argument and how did Plantinga respond?

Answer 11

Anselm could have responded that he was talking about necessary beings like God not contingent beings like an island that changes.

Plantinga

Question 12

How could have Anselm respond to Gaunlio’s argument and how did Plantinga respond?

Answer 12

Anselm could have responded that he was talking about necessary beings like God not contingent beings like an island that changes.

Plantinga said that an island has no intrinsic maxim - it can always be improved eg) by adding tress. God has n intrinsic maxim as he is the greatest conceivable being and therefore Gaunlio’s argument fails.

Question 13

What are Kant’s criticisms of Descartes argument?

Answer 13

Kant argues against Descartes as he says God is part of the Noumenal world so he can’t be known through reason

1) He says that existence is not a predicate as it doesn’t add to our understanding. He uses the example of 100 thalers (German silver coins) and says saying they exist doesn’t add anything.
2) Kant says that we must first establish if something exists before we describe it - we can’t say something exists a priori as all existential statements are synthetic.

3)

Question 14

What are Kant’s criticisms of Descartes argument?

Answer 14

Kant argues against Descartes as he says God is part of the Noumenal world so he can’t be known through reason

1) He says that existence is not a predicate as it doesn’t add to our understanding. He uses the example of 100 thalers (German silver coins) and says saying they exist doesn’t add anything.
2) Kant says that we must first establish if something exists before we describe it - we can’t say something exists a priori as all existential statements are synthetic.
3) Existence may be an intrinsic part of God but that being does not have to exist in reality - we can reject an object and its predicates.

Question 15

What is Russell’s criticism of the ontological argument?

Answer 15

• Existence is only meaningful if it refers to an instance of something
• He also said if existence existence was a predicate then syllogism would be true
  Eg) Eeyore

Question 16

What is Hume’s criticism of the ontological argument?

Answer 16

If we can conceive of things existing we can conceive of them not existing. We cannot say something necessarily exist or define something into existence.