Ontological Argument

• Apriori- Through reason
• Deductive argument- moves from premise to conclusion
• Anselm’s First Form
• Anselm’s second Form
• Gaunilo’s Criticism
• Descartes
• Kant’s Criticism

• Written by theists for theists
• Apriori- Through reason
• Aims to prove the existence of God via reason and logic alone
• Deductive argument- moves from premise to conclusion

• Began by defining God as ‘a being than which nothing greater can be conceived’
• If it is the greatest it must exist more than in peoples thoughts
• Must exist separate from peoples thoughts
• As a formal deductive argument it is:
  • God is the greatest possible being (nothing greater can be conceived)
  • If God exists in the mind alone (only as an idea), then a greater being could be imagined to exist both in the mind and in reality
  • This being would then be greater than God
  • Thus God cannot exist only as an idea in the mind
  • Therefore God exists both in the mind (as an idea)and in reality
• Therefore God exists both in the mind (as an idea) and in reality
• It is self-contradictory to be able to conceive of something than which nothing greater can be thought and yet to deny that that something exists

• Developed to demonstrate God cannot not exist
• Idea that God is eternal and always has been/ not limited by or in time
• God  has necessary existence: he could not not be
• Greater than a being whom comes in and out of existence (contingent being)
• As a deductive argument it is:
  • God is the greatest possible being (nothing greater can be conceived)
  • It is greater to be a necessary  being (cannot not be) than a contingent being (can cease to exist)
  • If God exists only as a contingent being can therefore be imagined not to exist, then a greater being could be imagined that cannot be conceived not to exist
  • This being would then be greater than God
  • God is therefore a necessary being
• God must exist in reality and he is a necessary being so cannot not exist

• Believed no one actually understands the nature of God
• We can have many ideas of unreal objects in our mind
• Gaunilo uses a philosophical device known as ‘reductio ad absurdum’
  • Consider the idea of a perfect island- the greatest possible island (nothing greater can be conceived)
  • If the greatest possible island exists in the mind alone (as an idea), then a greater island could be imagined to exist both in the mind and in reality
  • This island would then be greater than the best possible island
  • Thus the best possible island cannot exist only as an idea in the mind
  • Therefore the best possible island exists both in the mind (as an idea)and in reality
• If you can prove the existence of anything there must be something wrong
• Anselm is not replying to Gaunilo in his second form, it is already written
• Gaunilo is a theist but is not persuaded by Anselm’s argument

• Revived Anselm’s argument in the seventeenth century
• Provides important support for Anselm’s argument
• Argument goes:
  • Begins with the notion of supremely perfect being (unlike Ansems negative formulation of a being than which no greater can be conceived)
  • As the supremely perfect being God must possess all possible perfections, including perfection of existence
  • Any being that ever failed to exist, or could ever fail to exist, would be less perfect than any being for which this would be an impossibility
  • Existence must therefore be a necessary attribute of the perfect being
• It would be self-contradictory to deny the existence of the supremely perfect being when the attribute of existence is necessary to his perfection
• In God alone we are entitled to infer his existence from the notion of him at the supremely perfect being

• Triangle:
  • Consider the idea of a triangle
  • Having this idea does not clearly does not mean that this idea exists, it remains product of the imagination
  • What it does require is that what he is thinking of must have the property of having the sum of its three angles equal to 180ºetc
  • Just as the sum of angles= 180ºis entailed in the very idea of a triangle, so existence is entailed in the very idea of a perfect being
• Descartes gives another example:
  • The fact he cannot conceive of a mountain without a valley does not mean that there are such things, actual mountains and actual valleys
  • All that is entailed is that if there is a mountain there is also a valley
  • The notion of a mountain or valley does not include the attribute of existence, the idea of a perfect being does

• Saw the argument as an exercise in verbal analysis
• He observes we can make two types of statements:
  • Analytical= we say nothing new about the world eg ‘a husband is married’
  • Synthetic= Does say something new about the world, have to check using our senses eg ‘Fred is married’
• He thinks when philosophers say ‘God is a necessary being’ or ‘God has to exist’ they are making an analytic statements, they are talking about what words mean not whether God exists or not
• Kant backs up his argument with his killer point:
  • Once upon a time there was a boy, the boy kicks the ball, makes a cup of tea, dances for 28 hours without stopping and he exists
• Kant asks ‘something unusual about the last one?’
• Kant says existence is not a predicate. Existence is not a property
• If you take away existence you take away everything

END