the ontological argument

The ontological argument is apriori (gained through experience)

Anselm part 1:

• God is "nothing than which greater can be concieved (imagined)" he is ultimately perfect 
• it is possible to think of a greater being that exists both in the mind and the reality and this being would be greater
• but if god is "nothing than which can greater can be concieved" then he must exist both in the mind and reality and must be necessary 

Anselm part 2: 

• it is impossible to think that god doesnt exist as he is a necessary being 
• if god was contingent then he wouldnt be the greatest as we can imagine himn not existing 
• therefore if god is necessary and "nothing than which can greater be concieved then it is logical to assume that he must exist 

Challenges of Anselms argument from Gaunilo

• used an analogy of the "perfect island" to challange the 1st part of Anselms argument and show that it didnt work 
• not valid to move from a definition to existence 
• imagine the most perfect island because perfection is part of existence means that it must exist to be the most perfect island 
• otherwise any ordinary island would be better because it exists 
• Gaunilo said that just because we can imagine something existing doesnt mean that it actually does

Anselm successfully refutes this challenge

• as an island is contingent 
• god is necessary and has intrinsic maximum 

Descartes followed on from Anselm and put forward his own version of the ontological argument 

• god is supremely perfect,he possesses all perfections and existence is part of existence 
• therefore god must exist 
• eg triangles have necessary predicates like 3 side and angles that add up to 180 degrees, if any of these predicates are taken away then it would no longer be a triangle
• this would be the same principles for the existence of god 

Kants objections to Descartes 

• existence is not a predicate,adding "and exists" to a definition of something gives it not more meaning 

Extra info

• Davies 100 coins in the imagination dont spend as must as in existence therefore existence must be a predicate 
• another philosopher said existence may not be a predicate but necessary existence may be