Topic 1.3 The Ontological Argument

?
What is deductive reasoning?
meaning if we accept the premises are true, then the conclusion must be true as well.
1 of 39
What does an apriori argument mean?
meaning the validity can be assessed before looking for evidence or experience. Based on understanding the definitions of words. E.g. All bachelors are unmarried men.
2 of 39
What does analytic mean?
where the predicate is already included in our definition of the subject. For example: Triangles are 3 sided.
3 of 39
Name 3 features of the Ontological Argument.
Deductive, analytic and a priori.
4 of 39
Once we understand the definition of God...
we can be sure that God actually exists.
5 of 39
What does aseity mean?
a being which is independent and is self-causing. Another name for a necessary being.
6 of 39
Do humans have a necessary or contingent existence?
Contingent - we don't contain the reason we exist within ourselves. And we are dependent on others for our existence, e.g. our parents.
7 of 39
What was Anselm responding to in his first argument?
In psalms 14-56, it states 'The fool says to himself ‘there is no God”.
8 of 39
What is Anselm's definition of God?
A being which nothing greater can be conceived
9 of 39
How does Anselm assign God's attributes?
Anything that makes God greater, is intrinsically part of him. For example, being omnipotent would make God more powerful, and so God is omnipotent.
10 of 39
Anselm states there is a difference in something existing in the mind (???) and in reality (???).
(in intellectu) and (in re)
11 of 39
How does Anselm use 'reductio ad absurdum' in his argument?
By stating it would be absurd to think of God being the greatest conceivable being but not existing in real life. Conclusion are invalid, so there God existing is valid.
12 of 39
Give the 3 premises of Anselm's first argument.
P1: God is a being which nothing greater can be conceived. P2: Something that exists in reality is bound to be greater than something that just exists in the mind. P3: If there is no other being greater than God, God cannot just exist as a concept.
13 of 39
What is the conclusion of Anselm's first argument?
God must exist in both the mind (in intellectu) and in reality (in re).
14 of 39
Give the 2 premises of Rene Descartes' ontological argument.
P1: God is a supremely perfect being + contains all omni qualities. P2: Existence is inherently perfect. C: God has existence as a perfection, therefore he exists.
15 of 39
What shape did Descartes use in his argument? Why?
Triangle - because we can think of the properties of a triangle though the mind, e.g. 3 sides, angles adding up to 180. Triangles aren't in the world + cannot be encountered through the senses, it doesn't mean they don't exist. This is like God.
16 of 39
Rene Descartes: God wouldn't be God if he didn't exist. Existence is _________ to the essence of God.
Fundamental.
17 of 39
Give the 2 premises + conclusion of Norman Malcolm's ontological argument.
P1: God's existence is either necessary or impossible. P2: God's existence is not impossible. C:God 's existence is is necessary
18 of 39
What is a logical impossibility?
something that cannot be possible.E.g. 1+1 cannot equal 2 and 3 at the same time.
19 of 39
Malcolm is arguing logically it would make sense for this being (God) to exists but not saying that it ________ does.
necessarily
20 of 39
Malcolm proves is not that God actually _____ but that logically if God does, he must exist __________.
exists. necessarily.
21 of 39
What is modal logic?
An area of philosophy concerned with that exists in an infinite number of other possible worlds.
22 of 39
What are Alvin Plantinga's 3 premises?
P1: There is a possible world with a being of maximal greatness. P2: This being has maximal excellence. P3: Our world is a possible world.
23 of 39
What is Alvin Plantinga's conclusion?
If this being exists in our world, therefore God exists.
24 of 39
Plantinga's weakness of there being a being with maximal greatness?
Not everyone would agree that there was such a being.
25 of 39
Give 1 main weakness of the ontological argument.
1. rely on an agreed defined on God. No consensus on the definition however and even if we did, we wouldn't know whether it was correct or not.
26 of 39
What did Thomas Aquinas say about a prior arguments?
They can never prove the existence of God, must search for a posteriori evidence.
27 of 39
What weaknesses did Immanuel Kant pick out?
Existence is not a predicate, it doesn't have to be an essence of God. Saying someone exists, doesn't tell us anything new about them.
28 of 39
Kant states that God exists can never be treated as an _______ statement. Why?
Analytic. As analytic statements can only tell us about ideas, not reality.
29 of 39
Bertrand Russell states that the following argument would be true if existence = predicate/ essence... Give the following argument and its meaning.
P1: Men exists. P2: Santa is a man. C: Santa Exists. However, we know Santa isn't real so therefore existence is not a predicate.
30 of 39
Gaunilo argues that there needs to be some form of ________ ______ that the island (or God) exists
empirical proof
31 of 39
Gaunilo undermined the ontological argument by saying...
he can use the same format to prove a mythical island exists, meaning you can wish anything into existence using Anselm's argument - not valid.
32 of 39
What is the important note about Gaunilo and Kant?
They both believed in the same conclusion as Anselm, that God exists, but didn't think Anselm had a strong argument of getting to the conclusion.
33 of 39
How did Anselm respond to Gaunilo's argument? What were the repercussions?
Anselm said the argument only worked for necessary beings. Fallacy called begging the question. As Anselm assumes the very thing that he is trying to prove. He makes existence part of the definition of God - weak argument.
34 of 39
Hume states that the notion of a ________ existence has no _______
necessary, meaning.
35 of 39
Hume states that something is only provable with a _______ ___________. Implications for the existence of God?
logical contradiction. God not existing doesn't do this so it makes God's existence contingent rather than necessary.
36 of 39
What logic does Brian Davies say the ontological argument uses? How does this undermined the argument?
Circular. E.g. a logical fallacy is; if I don't fill my car up -> it will stop running. My car stopped running -> I must not have filled my car. Although the forward is true, the reverse is not necessarily. God's reality in question.
37 of 39
Who came up with the Parable of the Invisible Gardener?
British Philosopher named John Wisdom.
38 of 39
How does the parable of the invisible gardener relate to God's existence?
Saying what is the difference between an invisible, intangible and entirely undetectable gardener and no gardener at all? Undermines God existing, especially in reality.
39 of 39

Other cards in this set

Card 2

Front

What does an apriori argument mean?

Back

meaning the validity can be assessed before looking for evidence or experience. Based on understanding the definitions of words. E.g. All bachelors are unmarried men.

Card 3

Front

What does analytic mean?

Back

Preview of the front of card 3

Card 4

Front

Name 3 features of the Ontological Argument.

Back

Preview of the front of card 4

Card 5

Front

Once we understand the definition of God...

Back

Preview of the front of card 5
View more cards

Comments

No comments have yet been made

Similar Philosophy resources:

See all Philosophy resources »See all Ontological Argument resources »