Ontological Argument

A priori
Deductive
Analytic
Anselm
1. First argument
  1. Definition of God
    1. 'That than which no greater can be concieved"
      1. We can conceive of things in intellectu
        In the mind
        But when they actually exist, in re
        In reality
        This is greater
        E.g. a painter conceives of a painting in his mind, but the painting is greater when it is finished in reality
        As God is the greatest conceivable being
        And existence is greater in re and in intellectu
        God must exist in re
        Otherwise a greater being could be concieved
  2. The fool says that in his heart...
    1. There is no God
2. Second argument
  1. Necessary being
    1. Greater than a contingent being
      1. Contingent beings depend on others for their existence
        Can be thought of not existing
        God is 'that than which no greater can be concieved'
        Therefore God must be necessary
        And therefore must exist
3. Written as a prayer to the fool
Responses to Anselm
1. Gaunilo
  1. 'On behalf of the fool'
    1. Example of the 'greatest conceivable island'
      1. Fool to believe that just because it exists in the mind it must exist in reality
  2. Gossip
    1. Just because you can conceive of the man of which you have been told, does not mean he exists
2. Platinga
  1. Supports Anselm against Gaunilo
    1. Island has no intrinsic maxim
      1. Can be improved
        Made greater
      2. God has an intrinsic maxim
        Cannot be any greater
3. Anselm to Gaunilo
  1. Not talking about a contingent thing like an island
    1. Talking about a necessary being, God
Descartes
1. God is a 'supremely perfect being'
  1. Existence is a predicate of God
    1. Cannot be separated from God
      1. Like how 3 angles adding up to 180 degrees is a necessary predicate of a triangle
        Or how a mountain cannot not have a valley
        Cannot conceive God without existence
        God's existence is a logical necessity
Criticisms of Descartes
1. Kant
  1. Existence is not a predicate
    1. 100 thalers
      1. Existence does not add to the value of the Thalers
        Therefore existence is not a prediacte
  2. All existential statements are synthetic
    1. Requires external evidence
    2. Require verification
  3. Can reject the concept and its predicates
    1. Can logically reject both God and his existence
      1. Existence may be part of God
        But God does not have to exist
2. Hume
  1. Cannot define something into existence
3. Russel
  1. Existence only meaningful when...
    1. It refers to an instance of something
      1. If exists was a predicate
        This syllogism would be true
        Men exist
        Santa is a man
        Santa exists
      2. We can see an 'instance' cows but not unicorns
Modern scholars
1. Malcolm
  1. God's existence
    1. Logically necessary or logically impossible
      1. God must have always existed or his existence is impossible
        Only that which is self contradictory is logically impossible
        Nothing logically impossible about 'God exists'
        Existence of God is logically necessary
2. Vardy
  1. Example of prime numbers
    1. Meaning of a word consists the way it is used
      1. "Prime numbers exist"
        The truth of this statement depends on the language surrounding their use
        You have to understand what it means to talk of God
        Athiest who denies God has missed the point
        If using the idea of a perfect being, he must necessarily exist
        Anti-realist response
3. Platinga
  1. Possible worlds
    1. Possible being in one world which has maximal greatness
      1. Being would only be maximally great if existed in every world
        God is a being of maximal greatness
        He must exist in every possible world
        Cannot not exist
        This is a possible world
        Therefore God exists

Next up

Ontological Argument

Description

Resource summary

Similar

	Created by ELeanor Turner about 10 years ago