To what extent does Kant successfully criticise the ontological argument?

?

To what extent does Kant successfully criticise the ontological argument?

Advantages

  • MAIN ARGUMENT: claiming somethings existence doesn't add to the concept or idea of that thing: Predicate- the part of a sentence containing a verb stating something about a subject. existence is NOT a predicate, a predicate is supposed to add something to a concept, so saying 'x exists' adds nothing to the idea of x
  • successfully shows diff between mental judgement and reality, our reason can understand ideas of a beings existence without its dependence on anything else

Disadvantages

  • Although Kant's criticisms are mainly directed to Descartes' OA, we can also apply to Anselm's Proslogion. if we accept gods property of necessary existence, cant claim it is also possible that god does not exist- contradictory, being dependant on somethings 'necessary existence', cant then say this being possibly doesnt exist...
  • Kant relies on epistemology (knowledge) cannot be certain of our knowledge. True essence cannot be found in the realm of experience- Locke

Evaluation

If necessary existence were a predicate of God, that only shows IF god exists then its necessary existence, NOT that God DOES exist, so successfully criticises Anselm's attempt to explain Gods definite existence.

Comments

No comments have yet been made

Similar Religious Studies resources:

See all Religious Studies resources »See all Philosophy resources »