Explain the Ontological Argument as outlined by Anselm.

Seite 1

Introduction -

Define the argument (a priori, deductive, analytic argument) - try to show that existence is a natural part of God's being.

Explain that the argument was set out by Anselm in his prayer, Proslogion Chapters Two and Three.

Paragraph 1 -

Outline the First Form -

God is the greatest possible being (nothing greater can be conceived)

If God exists in the mind alone (only as an idea), then a greater being

could be imagined to exist both in the mind and in reality (even the "fool" has the idea of God)

This being would then be greater than God

Thus God cannot exist only as an idea in the mind

Therefore, God exists both in the mind (as an idea) and in reality.

Outline the Painter Analogy -

Anselm used the image of a painter imagining a painting in his head. He said that the painting would be better in reality, because then everyone could see it, not just the painter. Anselm used this analogy with God. He said that because God is the Greatest Concievable Being, He must exist in reality as well as in the mind.

Paragraph 2 -

Outline Gaunilo's Criticism-

Gaunilo took Anselm's First Form and replaced "God" with "Perfect Island" to show how absurd Anselm's argument really was. He said that just because a perfect island exists in everyone's minds, doesn't mean it exists in reality, even though that would make it truly perfect.

Both Gaunilo and Aquinas rejected the argument on the grounds that no mere mortal (human) could ever understand or concieve God's nature.

Outline the Second Form -

Either God exists or He does not exist

If God exists, God’s existence must be necessary

If God does not exist, then his existence is logically impossible

God is not a logically impossible thing

Therefore, God’s existence is necessary

Therefore, God exists

Paragraph 3 -

Outline the criticisms -

Hume rejects the idea that anything can exist necessarily without empirical evidence.

C.D. Broad dismissed the coherence of a "maximally great being", and suggests that some aspects of greatness are incompatible with others.

Gasking asserted that the creation of the world is the most marvellous achievement imaginable. The merit of such an achievement is the product of its quality and the creator's disability: the greater the disability of the creator, the more impressive the achievement. Non-existence, Gasking asserts, would be the greatest handicap. Therefore, if the universe is the product of an existent creator, we could conceive of a greater being—one which does not exist. A non-existent creator is greater than one which exists, so God does not exist. Gasking's proposition that the greatest disability would be non-existence is a response to Anselm's assumption that existence is a predicate and perfection. Gasking uses this logic to assume that non-existence must be a disability.

Russell drew a distinction between existence and essence, arguing that the essence of a person can be described and their existence still remain in question.

Dawkins described the argument as "infantile" because of the leap of faith.

New Page