Ontological Argument

?

Ontological Argument

Advantages

  • Anselm: It is a deductive argument, the definition of God as "that than which nothing greater can be conceived" is accepted by the atheist, even if the atheist denies that there is such a being in existence
  • Descartes:argument does not reley on what he regarded as unreliable empirical evidence, Because he could conceive his own existence, he believed that he could also conceive of the existence of a perfect being, "Cognito, ergo sum -I think therefore I am"
  • Platinga: Since God is maximally great and perfect, then he must exist in all possible worlds and will be the same in each one of them, "The greatest possible being must have maximal excellence in every possible world"

Disadvantages

  • Gaunilo:when this logic is applied to other things than it would lead to invalid conclusions, Perfect Island analogy, "Even the fool, then, must be conceived that a being than which no greater can be thought exists at least in his understanding"
  • Aquinas: Anselm made a `transitional error` by moving from the definition of God to the existence of God, should be priori, Anselm made an assumption about the definition of God that was not shared by all believers
  • Kant: "God is an object of pure thought", opposed the view from Anslem that existence was necessary for perfection as it is a predicate, If God had all perfections than a predicate of God would be that he actually existed

Evaluation

Without the evidence and experience of the universe on which to draw, the argument needs to be analytically sound. It may be regarded by some as successful if the first premise is universally accepted, but the real weakness is that it lacks empirical evidence and reason alone cannot show that an absolutely necessary being exists or does not exist.

Comments

No comments have yet been made

Similar Religious Studies resources:

Anselm
See all Religious Studies resources »See all Philosophy resources »