Ontological Argument

• Immanent
• Personal
• Transcendent
• Omnipotent
• Omniscient
• Necessary
• Predicate
• Supremely perfect
• Anselm
• Intrinsic maximum
• Contingent
• Synthetic hypothesis
• Tired tautology
• Syllogism

• Anselm's argument is a priori and analytic
• God is 'that than which nothing greater can be conceived'
• Even the non-believer must have a definition of God, if only to dismiss His existence
  • "The fool says in his heart 'there is no God'" - Psalm 14:1
• That which exists in reality is greater than that which exists only in the mind
  • example: money
• God must exist in reality
• God's existence is necessary

• God is a 'supremely perfect being'
• Existence is a predicate of a perfect being
  • Having three sides is a predicate of a triangle
• God must exist to avoid being self-contradictory (like a triangle without three sides)

• Gaunilo uses the idea of an island to criticise Anselm
• He argues that if you claimed that the perfect island must exist simply because it is perfect
• However, Gaunilo's criticism is not valid; even if he had spoken of "an island than which no greater island could be conceived" as there is no "intrinsic maximum" for an island - an island can always be improved (pointed out by Plantinga)
• Furthermore, Anselm pointed out that islands are contingent - they don't need to exist for us to imagine them
• To be different from all existing islands the island could not exist

• One can define a thing as one sees fit, but whether or not anything matches that definition in reality is another question altogether

Objection to the ontological argument as analytic

• Kant argues that the Ontological Argument is actually a synthetic hypothesis
  • as an analytic argument is the Ontological Argument is circular
  • it says something like "God is an existing being so God exists"
  • Kant refers to it as a "tired tautology"

Objection to the uniqueness of God

• Anselm argued that the ontological argument only works when applied to God, because God exists in a different way from everything else
  • Kant argues that God cannot be an exception to the rule

Objection to Descartes' triangle

• Kant objects to Descartes' claim that denying God's existence is tantamount ot denying that triangles have three sides - he states that if one dismisses both the idea of the three sides (predicate) and that of the triangle itself (subject), one is left with no contradiction

Objection to existence being a predicate

• Kant argues that existence is not a predicate as a predicate has to tell us something about the subject
  • If I have 200 existing pounds and 200 imaginary pounds, the idea pound remains exactly the same whether it exists or not
  • Kant also point out a logical contradiction: If "X exists" tells us about a property that X has, then "X does not exist" denies that it has this property. But how can something which doesn't exist lack anything?

Objection to existence being a predicate

• Existence cannot be a predicate or else we would be able to construct this argument, which is a syllogism:
  • Men exist.
  • Santa Claus is a man.
  • Therefore, Santa Claus exists.
    • Existence is not a property of things but of the ideas of those things

Objection to our use of predicates being enough to demonstrate that something exists

• The statement "the present king of France is bald" is not true
  • However this does not mean that the statement "the present king of France is not bald" is true
  • (there is no present king of France)

Objection to the idea that God's existence is self-evident

• The statement "there is no truth" is contradictory if it is to be believed
  • The statement "there is no God" is not contradictory as a state of godlessness can be imagined

Objection to Anselm's definition of God

• Does everyone agree with Anselm's definition of God?
  • Ontological argument assumes we have a shared understanding of God

• Malcolm argues that Proslogion 3 is not subject to the same criticism as Proslogion 2 as it does not treat existence as a predicate
• Malcolm develops Proslogion 3 and argues that "IF God exists His existence is necessary"
  • God's existence is either impossible or necessary
  • It can be the former only if the concept of such a being is self-contradictory or in some way logically absurd. Assuming this is not so, it follows that He necessarily exists
• Malcolm: criticised by Brian Davies

• Plantinga developed the idea of "possible worlds"
  • e.g: in our world, John F Kennedy was an American president. This, however, was not necessary; he could have made a different career choice and been an estate agent. This is an example of a possible world.
• Plantinga offers a description of another possible world:
  • There is a possible world, W, in which there exists a being with 'maximal greatness'
  • A being has maximal greatness only if it exists in every possible world.
• A problem is that Plantinga has only defined maximal greatness as existing in every world, but in one of these worlds there could be a greater being.
  • Plantinga deals with this problem by introducing the concept of "maximal excellence":
    • Maximal greatness entails maximal excellence
    • Maximal excellence entails omnipotence, omniscience and moral perfection

Therefore:

• There is a possible world in which there is a being that is maximally great
• It has maximal excellence (entailed within maximal greatness)
• If omnipotent, omniscient and morally perfect, and maximally great, it is existent in our world
• Therefore, there is a God

• Brian Davies argues that even if a being with maximal excellence is possible, and therefore it is possible that such a being exists in our world, it does not follow that such a being actually exists

• Frege distinguishes between 'first-' and 'second-order' predicates
  • A first-order predicate tells us about the nature of something
    • e.g. "the hourses are brown"
  • A second-order tells us about concepts
    • e.g. "the horses are numerous"

Frege's objection to Anselm and Descartes

• Frege says that both Anselm and Descartes seem to use existence as a first-order predicate, whereas it is actually a second-order predicate