The Ontological Argument
- Created by: Amy_Holland
- Created on: 14-05-16 15:48
View mindmap
- The Ontological Argument
- Anselm
- Second Argument
- P1: God is the greatest conceivable being
- P2: If God were contingent, he would not be the greatest being.
- Conc: But God is necessary, so he exists as necessity.
- First Argument
- P1: God is something that which nothing greater can be concieved
- P2: If he only existed in the mind, then he would not be the greatest conceivable being.
- Conc: God exists in reality
- Second Argument
- Gaunilo's response
- First Argument
- P1: God is something that which nothing greater can be concieved
- P2: If he only existed in the mind, then he would not be the greatest conceivable being.
- Conc: God exists in reality
- P1: If Anselm’s proof for the existence of a greatest conceivable being were sound, then we could give a sound proof for the existence of a greatest conceivable island.
- P2: We cannot give a sound proof of the existence of a greatest conceivable island.
- Conc. Anselm’s proof for the existence of a greatest conceivable being is
not sound.
- Anselm responded to Guanilo by arguing tht an island is contingent and has no intrinsic value so can't be compared to a necessary being which is God.
- Anselm responded to Guanilo by arguing tht an island is contingent and has no intrinsic value so can't be compared to a necessary being which is God.
- First Argument
- Descartes argument.
- P2: Existence is a perfection
- P1: God is a supremely perfect being.
- Conc: God must exist.
- Kants objections
- Descartes argument.
- P2: Existence is a perfection
- P1: God is a supremely perfect being.
- Conc: God must exist.
- Kant said existence is not a predicate. To say something exists adds nothing to the definition of the thing,
- Descartes argument.
- Anselm
Comments
No comments have yet been made