The Ontological Argument

The Ontological Argument

1. Anselm

   • Used the statement in Psalms that said " a fool says in his heart there is no God"
   • The Proslogion
     • Reductio ad absurdum
       • Proof by contradiction
         • Both forms of the argument do this
         • Proving your version is right by suggesting that the opposite would prove an absurd result
     • God is the greatest conceivable being
       • God is "aliquid quo nihil mauis possibit"
     • Part 2
       • Same format but with contingency and neccessity
       • When he paints it it exists in his reality and his understanding
       • It exists in his understanding
       • The painter knows what he is going to paint before he paints it
       • God is the greatest conceivable being
       • It is better to have always existed then to stop existing
       • If God stop existing a greater being could be conceived that always exists
       • Therefore God must always exist
     • Part 1
       • Therefore God must exist.
         • To think God doesn't would be a contradiction to the 1st premise
       • If God existed only in the mind a greater being could be conceived that exists in both
       • It is greater to exist in the mind and reality rather than just reality
       • God is the greatest conceivable being

2. Descartes

   • Cogito ergo sum
     • I think therefore I am
     • Though he could prove he exists, he could not prove the existence of everything else
   • He believed that the knowledge of the triangles properties did not come from his senses as his senses would not derive the triangles properties as clearly as his mind would
   • Part 2
     • God is a supremely perfect being
     • Existence is a perfection
     • If God did not exist he would not be supremely perfect as existence is a perfection
     • Therefore God must exist
     • A supremely perfect being has all the perfections
   • When considering critisms
     • To think of God without existence is to think of a mountain without valleys or a triangle without three sides

3. Background

   • A priori
     • Not based on experience
     • Tries to prove Gods existence through logic alone

4. Critisms

   • Guanillo
     • Anselms first part.
       • You cant define something into existence
         • You can think of the perfect island but doesn't mean it exists.
           • Everyone's idea of perfection is different (subjective)
       • You can add or take things from the perfect island but you can't from God as he is necessary
     • In "on behalf of the fool"
   • Aquinas
     • Everyones definition of God is different
     • We dont have an innate concept of God. Even if we did it is confused
     • How can someone who is contingent have the correct concept of one who is not
     • He is beyond human understanding
   • Hume
     • It is not possible to take an idea in someones mind, apply pure logic to it and come with a conclusion based entirely in the external, observable universe
     • existence is not a predicate
     • Responses
       • Some would say, as human beings we base our lives around that which we can observe rather than what we can rationally prove. However is this the case??
   • Kant
     • existence is not a predicate
       • a predicate must give us information about the subject. To say something exists does not give us any description
     • God can not be placed in a separate category than everything else
       • In doing this anselm and descartes have given a synthetic proposition an analytical status and broken the rules of grammer
         • In an analytical statement the subject definition is contained within the assertion, for example " a square has four sides"
           • To suggest that a square does not have four sides is illogical.
         • Propositions related to existence are synthetic because because you have to prove that the thing in question exists and so it is not evident in the statement