Origins of the ontological argument - Anselm

What does a priori and deductive mean?

• A priori - based on logic, prior to experience

• Deductive - If the premises are true then the conclusion will be true

What are analytic statements?

• True by definition

What does ‘in re’ and ‘in intellectu' mean?

• In re - in reality

• In intellectu - in the mind

What do deductive arguments look at doing?

• Deductive arguments hold that it is logically necessary for God to exist.

• They can also be categorised as a priori arguments due to being based on logic.

• Rely on logic, not experiences.

What does ‘ontos’ mean?

• Being

What does Paul Tillich argue about the way God exists?

• Paul Tillich argued that God does not ‘exist'‘ in the way that things in the universe exist.

• His existence is different from existence of anything else.

How do Ontological arguments work?

• Ontological arguments work from principles and definitions in an attempt to demonstrate the existence of God.

• They use logic to conclude Gods existence, rather than sensory experience.

• According to the ontological argument, almost everything exists contingently.

• However, according to religious believers God is necessary - he has not come about because of anything, there was no time when God didn’t exist there is nothing that could happen that would cause God to cease to exist.

• God’s existence is different.

Who was St Anselm and why did he create an ontological argument?

• Anselm was an Archbishop of Canterbury and a Benedictine monk.

• He created an ontological argument, not to convert unbelievers but to demonstrate the rationality behind his own faith.

• He wanted to show that it made sense believing in God.

What is Anselm’s definition of God?

• ‘The being that than which nothing greater can be conceived’

• To Anselm everyone, even atheists understand God to be the pinnacle of everything, you cannot even think of anything greater than God.

What is a quote about the fool?

• ‘The fool says in his heart, there is no God’

• ‘How was the fool be able to ‘say in his heart’ what he was unable to conceive’

Is the statement ‘God exists’ an analytic or synthetic statement?

• The ontological argument states it is an analytical statement.

What is Anselm’s first argument - proslogion 2?

1. God is the ‘being that than which nothing greater can be conceived’

2. God may exist either in the mind alone, or also in reality.

3. Something that exists in both the reality and the mind is greater than something which only exits as an idea in the mind alone.

4. Conclusion - God must exist in reality and the mind - or we haven’t thought of the greatest possible being.

How could you disagree with this argument?

• You can disagree because it is not always the case that something that exists in reality and the mind is greater than just an idea in the mind alone.

• Because you can think of something negative that you wouldn’t want to be reality.

• Meaning its existence is not greater by also existing in reality than just the mind.

• E.g. overthinking about getting bad grades.

What is the painter analogy to support his first argument?- proslogion 2

• When a painter begins to paint work, it will only exist in their mind at first.

• It is better for the painting to exist in reality than the mind.

• The painter can imagine a painting but it is inferior to the painting that exists in reality.

What are features of the first argument - proslogion 2?

• God is the ‘being that than which nothing grater can be conceived.’ - Anselm expects everyone will accept this definition.

• Reductio ad absurdum - proof by contradiction, if he does only exist in the mind alone then he is no the greatest possible being - absurd.

• Gods existence is analytic - once we analyse the definition of the term we will see that God exists.

• Painter and painting analogy.

• Anyone who doesn’t accept it is a ‘fool’ as it is plain and obvious.

What is the basis of Anselm’s second argument? - proslogion 3

• Anselm is arguing that God must exist, because a necessary being cannot fail to exist - only contingent beings do that.

• Necessary existence is part of the definition of God.

• It makes no sense to talk of a God who doesn’t exist because then he wouldn’t be God.

What is Anselm’s second argument? - proslogion 3

1. God is the ‘being that than which nothing greater can be conceived.’

2. Contingent beings are inferior to necessary beings.

3. Because God is TTWNGCBC, he must have necessary existence.

4. conclusion - Therefore God exists necessarily.

What are the features of Anselm’s second argument - proslogion 3?

• Adds to the idea that it is impossible for God not to exist - God is necessary.

• It has been argued that his second argument was aimed at believers as a proof that existence in God is rational. - To justify a belief in God.

What is Gaunilo’s criticism?

• Gaunilo claimed that the flaws in Anselm’s logic would become obvious if someone went through the argument again - but replacing the idea of God with the idea of an island.

• He explained that we could imagine the most excellent lost island, we understand the implications of the term ‘ the most excellent island’, therefore this notion exists as a concept in our understanding.

• Using Anselm’s logic we might go on to say that for such an island to exist in our mind it means that this is inferior to the same island existing in reality.

• If our island is truly the most excellent, it cannot be inferior to any other island - it must exist in reality.

• But clearly there is no such island in reality - we cannot define something into existence.

What is a quote from Gaunilo?

• If someone said that the ‘island actually exists somewhere in reality… I would think he were joking.

How did Anselm reply to Gaunilo, and what is a quote from Alvin Plantinga?

• Gaunilo missed the point.

• God isn’t a perfect thing like an island - God is THE perfect thing.

• Islands can always be improved, God cannot.

• ‘Islands have no ‘intrinsic maximum’ - Alvin Plantinga

What else did Anselm say about God not being like an island?

• Anselm said that islands are not independent or self-sufficient.

• Only God is independent or self sufficient.

• The argument cannot be applied to people or places - but only to God as they are fundamentally different.