Arguments based on reason
- Created by: AroojTahir
- Created on: 20-04-19 13:40
View mindmap
- Arguments based on reason
- Anselm's Ontological Argument
- Anselm argues the athiest knows what they are rejecting- understand God to say he does not exist.
- Painter imagines painting in mind. Painting it into existence. Understanding into reality.
- Anselm's two different types of existence: existence in the mind and reality.
- Definition of God that there's nothing greater. Greatest possible being.
- God must exist in the mind. Definition of God: greatest being. Greatest to exist in mind and reality.
- "the fool say in his heart, there is no God" Aquinas.
- "[God] you alone, can be conceived not to exist" Anselm.
- Guanilo versus Anselm
- The perfect island
- Guanilo with his perfect island that has the most riches etc.
- Guanilo- imagine the island, exist in your mind.
- You are told that there's no doubt that the island exists as it logically must be, excellent to exist in reality.
- Guanilo suggests internal logic, Anselm used was equally false.
- Guanilo's other people.
- Unreal things in our mind.
- We may believe something unreal someone tells us, gossip isn't true.
- Do not all have the same. understanding of God.
- Never understand something from the description alone: different people have different pictures in their minds when some words are spoken.
- We cannot define something into existence. Aware of our existence but think of non-existence.
- Anselm's reply
- Anselm replies to Gaunilo through reaffirming his definition of God as he cannot not exist.
- A being that nothing greater can be thought of, placed in your mind= God.
- Contradictionof saying God is the greatest but may not exist. Anselm says God isn't special.
- Anselm says Guanilo misplaces logic. God is necessary and the island is contingent.
- Anselm other possible matters are things attributed e.g. thinking about good.
- "fleece, the being than which a greater is inconceivable must be whatever should be attributed to the divine essence" Anselm's reply to Gaunilo.
- The perfect island
- Kant's criticisms
- Kant criticises the ontological argument. It is useful to understand the way sentences are made.
- Objection One:
- True that existence is part of what its meant for a perfect God.
- Triangle is part of what it means to be a triangle.
- Judgement helps us understand and not from the existence of a triangle.
- Jusgment isn't the same as the necessity of something. Triangles three sides if the triangle exists first.
- Kant- ontological argument bad logical as they suggest it justify God's perfection.
- Can make an object and define it in various ways but doesn't make the object reality.
- For Kant, if God exists then he necessarily exists.
- Objection Two:
- Nature of existence as a predicate.
- Kant doesn't believe existence is a proper audience- determining predicate.
- Kant 'this book is a revision guide; tells about the book, 'book exists' doesn't tell me about the cause.
- Kant says thinkers who use the ontological argument are treating existence in the wrong way.
- Assessing the ontological argument
- Can existence be treated as a predicate?
- Kant: existence isn't a determining predicate, doesn't give us the same information.
- Gaunilo: suspicious of Anselm and define things into existence- lost island has predicate, but not existence.
- Kant: predicate only a predicate as it has a subject, so the subject is rejected there would be no case to answer.
- Are there logical fallacies in this argument?
- God can be defined into existence.
- Anselm doesn't define greatness and different people define it in different ways.
- Is it fair to say that everyone has a common understanding of God?
- Does the ontological argument justify beliefs?
- Ontological argument doesn't say anything about the nature of God. No full picture of God.
- Anselm's writing was to praise God and glorify him.
- Anselm: meditation on God's existence for a believe than proof to non-believer. Unlikely to convince atheist of God's existence.
- Assumption that a believer should know everything about God. Religious people comfy with glimpse of God.
- Can existence be treated as a predicate?
- Compare Priori and Posteriori arguments
- Posteriori arguments: physical evidence in world to come to conclusions.
- Possible to prove God's existence priori than lacking doubt- logical poofs like maths.
- Posteriori arguments: issues of interpretation.
- Priori arguments better:
- Experience deceives us e.g. unwell pr psychological-influences.
- Priori argument: defined terms so logic follows easily.
- Modern forms of ontological arguments convincing.
- Experience+Observationsof world= unreliable and pure logic reliable.
- A posteriori arguments are better:
- Aquinas x priori ontological argument as you don't know the nature of God, so can't follow (Anselm's argument).
- Hume rejects ontological argument, cannot think of a being not not existing.
- People work naturally from experience.
- Likely Gods, work is evident in the world around us.
- Going further: Descartes' argument
- Descartes shielded way from using sensory as rational thought was more reliable.
- Triangle determined by three angles that add up to 180 degrees.
- God is the 'supremely perfect being' must exist, existence key to God having angles adding up two angles= triangle.
- Like a mountain and valley. God and existencce coincide.
- Anselm's Ontological Argument
Comments
No comments have yet been made