Whether existence is a predicate

Question 1

Question: How does Anselm strengthen his argument in Proslogion chapter 3?

Strength: Anselm strengthens his argument in Proslogion chapter 3 to include necessary existence

Answer 1

Answer: Anselm strengthens his argument by introducing the concept of necessary existence, arguing that a being whose nonexistence is impossible is greater than one whose nonexistence is possible.

Question 2

Question: Why does Anselm argue that existence is greater than non-existence?

Strength: Anselm strengthens his argument in Proslogion chapter 3 to include necessary existence

Answer 2

Answer: Anselm argues that existence is greater than non-existence because a being that cannot cease to exist is greater than one that can, implying that necessary existence is a greater attribute.

Question 3

Question: What does Malcolm highlight regarding dependence in Anselm’s argument?

Strength: Anselm strengthens his argument in Proslogion chapter 3 to include necessary existence

Answer 3

Answer: Malcolm points out that dependence implies a limitation, and in common language, concepts of dependence and limitation are linked to inferiority.

Therefore, a being that does not depend on anything else (is necessary) is considered unlimited and thus the greatest conceivable being.

Question 4

Question: What does Anselm’s argument in its strongest form conclude?

Strength: Anselm strengthens his argument in Proslogion chapter 3 to include necessary existence

Answer 4

Answer: In its strongest form, Anselm’s argument concludes that a being greater than which cannot be conceived must be one whose nonexistence is impossible, thereby emphasizing the necessity of existence as a defining characteristic.

Question 5

Question: How does Anselm justify the superiority of necessary existence in his argument?

Strength: Anselm strengthens his argument in Proslogion chapter 3 to include necessary existence

Answer 5

Anselm justifies the superiority of necessary existence by arguing that a being whose nonexistence is impossible is greater than one whose nonexistence is possible, thereby establishing the necessity of existence as a superior attribute.

Question 6

Question: What is Kant’s second objection to Anselm and Descartes’ arguments?

Weakness: Kant’s 2nd objection: existence is not a predicate.

Answer 6

Answer: Kant argues that existence is not a predicate or quality that defines a thing, contrary to Anselm and Descartes who assume that existence is a predicate.

Question 7

Question: How does Kant illustrate his objection to the idea of existence as a predicate?

Weakness: Kant’s 2nd objection: existence is not a predicate.

Answer 7

Answer: Kant uses the example of imagining 100 thalers (coins) as a mere concept in the mind versus 100 thalers that actually exist in reality, arguing that the concept remains the same regardless of its existence.

Question 8

Question: According to Kant, what does it mean to say something exists?

Weakness: Kant’s 2nd objection: existence is not a predicate.

Answer 8

Answer: Kant argues that to say something exists is not to describe a feature or attribute of that thing; rather, it is to make a statement about its reality in a general sense.

Question 9

Question: How does Kant refute the idea that existence is part of the definition of a thing?

Weakness: Kant’s 2nd objection: existence is not a predicate.

Answer 9

Answer: Kant argues that the concept of a thing remains the same whether it exists only in the mind or is instantiated in reality, suggesting that existence is not part of the definition or predicate of a thing.

Question 10

Question: What is Kant’s criticism of Anselm and Descartes’ claim regarding the necessity of existence for God?

Weakness: Kant’s 2nd objection: existence is not a predicate.

Answer 10

Answer: Kant disagrees with Anselm and Descartes, arguing that it is not incoherent to think of God without existence because existence is not a predicate or defining quality of a thing.

Question 11

Question: How does Kant challenge the notion that existence is a predicate?

Weakness: Kant’s 2nd objection: existence is not a predicate.

Answer 11

Answer: Kant challenges the idea that existence is a predicate by arguing that the concept of a thing remains the same whether it exists only in the mind or is instantiated in reality, indicating that existence is not part of the definition or predicate of a thing.

Question 12

Question: What does Kant argue about the concept of existence?

Weakness: Kant’s 2nd objection: existence is not a predicate.

Answer 12

Answer: Kant argues that the concept of existence is not a defining quality or predicate of a thing; rather, it is a statement about the reality of that thing in a general sense.

Question 13

Question: What is Kant’s objection to Anselm’s claim about the necessity of God’s existence?

Weakness: Kant’s 2nd objection: existence is not a predicate.

Answer 13

Answer: Kant objects to Anselm’s claim by arguing that it is not necessary to conceive of God with existence, as existence is not a defining quality or predicate of a thing.

Question 14

Question: According to Kant, what does it mean to say that something exists?

Weakness: Kant’s 2nd objection: existence is not a predicate.

Answer 14

Answer: Kant argues that to say something exists is not to describe a feature or attribute of that thing; rather, it is to make a statement about its reality in a general sense.

Question 15

Question: How does Kant’s objection challenge the ontological argument?

Weakness: Kant’s 2nd objection: existence is not a predicate.

Answer 15

Answer: Kant’s objection challenges the ontological argument by undermining the premise that existence is a defining quality or predicate of a thing, thereby questioning the necessity of God’s existence based on conceptual grounds.

Question 16

Question: What was Malcolm’s criticism of Kant’s objection to the ontological argument?

Evaluation defending the ontological argument

Answer 16

Answer: Malcolm argued that Kant’s objection failed to distinguish between contingent and necessary existence, asserting that Kant’s critique applied only to contingent existence, not necessary existence.

Question 17

Question: How does Malcolm respond to Kant’s objection regarding contingent existence?

Evaluation defending the ontological argument

Answer 17

Answer: Malcolm argues that contingent existence does not have the same ontological status as necessary existence because contingent things depend on external factors for their existence, while necessary beings contain the reason for their existence within themselves.

Question 18

Question: According to Malcolm, what distinguishes necessary existence from contingent existence?

Evaluation defending the ontological argument

Answer 18

Answer: Malcolm asserts that necessary existence is distinguished from contingent existence by the fact that necessary beings contain the reason for their existence within themselves, whereas contingent things depend on external factors for their existence.

Question 19

Question: How does Malcolm defend the ontological argument against Kant’s objection?

Evaluation defending the ontological argument

Answer 19

Answer: Malcolm defends the ontological argument by arguing that necessary existence is a defining part of a thing, unlike contingent existence, which depends on external factors. Therefore, Kant’s critique does not apply to the ontological argument, which relies on necessary existence.

Question 20

Question: What is Malcolm’s response to Kant’s criticism regarding existence as a predicate?

Evaluation defending the ontological argument

Answer 20

Answer: Malcolm contends that Kant’s objection overlooks the distinction between contingent and necessary existence, asserting that necessary existence is indeed a predicate that defines a thing, as opposed to contingent existence.

Question 21

Question: According to the evaluation, what is a predicate of God?

Evaluation defending the ontological argument

Answer 21

Answer: Necessary existence is considered a predicate of God, defining and describing God as a necessary being.

Question 22

Question: How does the evaluation respond to Anselm and Malcolm’s argument about necessary existence?

Evaluation defending the ontological argument

Answer 22

Answer: The evaluation agrees with Anselm and Malcolm that necessary existence is a predicate of God, distinguishing it from contingent existence found in objects like cats and coins.

Question 23

Question: What is Kant’s first criticism of the ontological argument?

Evaluation defending the ontological argument

Answer 23

Answer: Kant’s first criticism suggests that even if necessary existence is a predicate of God, it only demonstrates that if God exists, then God necessarily exists, without proving that God actually exists.

Question 24

Question: What limitation of the ontological argument does Kant’s first criticism highlight?

Evaluation defending the ontological argument

Answer 24

Answer: Kant’s first criticism points out that the ontological argument fails to establish the actual existence of God, only demonstrating the necessity of God’s existence if God were to exist.

Question 25

Question: How does Kant’s first criticism challenge the conclusion of the ontological argument?

Evaluation defending the ontological argument

Answer 25

Answer: Kant’s first criticism challenges the ontological argument’s conclusion by highlighting that it does not provide evidence for the actual existence of God, but only addresses the necessity of God’s existence under the assumption of God’s existence.

Question 26

Evaluation criticizing the ontological argument

Question 27

Evaluation criticizing the ontological argument

Question 28

Evaluation criticizing the ontological argument

Question 29

Evaluation criticizing the ontological argument

Question 30

Evaluation criticizing the ontological argument