- Created by: Jealousoatmeal
- Created on: 18-02-17 12:30
St Anselm's First Ontological Argument
- A priori
- Reductio ad absurdum
1. 'The fool says in his heart 'there is no God'
2. God is the greatest possible being - even the fool accepts this
3. Imagine two beings: one is perfect but exists only in the mind and the other is perfect but exists in reality
4. It's more perfect to exist in reality
5. God is the most perfect thing therefore He must exist in reality
6. God exists and the fool is foolish for accepting God as the greatest possible being but not His existance in the world when the two are in fact mutually necessary.
Gaunilo's challenge to St Anselm's Onto Arg
Reduction ad absurdum.
Gaunilo argues that just because you can imagine it doesn't make it real. Replace God with 'Perfect Island.
1. 'The fool says in his heart 'there is no Perfect Island'
2. Perfect Island is the greatest possible island - even the fool accepts this
3. Imagine two islands: one is perfect but exists only in the mind and the other is perfect but exists in reality
4. It's more perfect to exist in reality
5. The Perfect Island is the most perfect thing therefore it must exist in reality
6. Perfect Island exists and the fool is foolish for accepting Perfect Island as the greatest possible island but not its existance in the world when the two are in fact mutually necessary.
An island can be said not to exist, this is stupid
St Anselm's Second Ontological Argument
God's existance is Necessary
To imagine a perfect being not existing is a contradiction of terms because the being is therefore not perfect.
A contingent being is not perfect as it is dependant on something and therefore not God. An island is contingent and therefore a good parallel.
God is perfect and necessary so He exists.
Aquinas' counter to the Ontological Argument
1 Human intelligence is limitted
2 We do not understand God
3 Anselm is overstepping the mark by claiming to prove God through definitions
4 How can you define something you don't understand.
Descartes' Ontological Argument + Leibniz's additi
1 God is perfect
2 Therefore He has all perfections
3 existence is a perfection
4 God Exists
Existance is a predicate here (A property of God)
Perfections - simple and positive. Not defined in terms of anything else or the negation of anything else and therefore non-contradictory.
Hume's counter and fork
Hume - empiricist
nothing can be proven a priori
The onto argument tells us about definitions, not the real world.
relations of ideas matters of fact
analytic statements synthetic statements
a priori a posteriori
true by definiton and demonstrably so. Tell us about the world, true by investigation
Kant's 2 counters to the Ontological Argument
1. Existence can be a predicate but it doesn't guarantee existence
- A horn is a predicate to a unicorn - doesn't make it real
Definition does not equal reality
We can deny that anything exists necessarily.
2. Existence is not a genuine predicate as it adds nothing to our understanding of an object.
e.g I have a large, blue mug and it exists.
Schopenhauer's Counter to Ontological Argument
Descartes is begging the question.
God is necessary = God exists but he says this before the conclusion:
God exists because God exists?
Russel's counters to the Ontological Argument
1. Existence is not a predicate simply a term that explains that something in the world that corresponds with the subject. It doesn't add anything to our understanding of the subject.
2. Saying something exists compares it to things that don't exist which is somewhat illogical
3. Empirical evidence is required to prove this and therefore it is not a predicate.
Malcolm's Ontological Argument
1. If God does not exist, He cannot be brought into the world as He cannot be contingent and be God.
2 Therefore if He does not exist it is impossible that He shall
3 If God does exist, He cannot cease to exist
4 If God exists, His existance must be necessary
5. God is either impossible or necessary
6. God is not impossible therefore He must be necessary and exist.
Plantinga's Ontological Argument
1. There is a possible world with a maximally great being
2. If the being is maximally great it must exist in every possible world
3 In all worlds this being is maximally great
4 Our world is a possible world
5 This being exists in our world
6 God exists