AQA A-Level Religious Studies - The Ontological Argument

What does 'onto' mean?

'essence, existence or being'

Who devised the Ontological Argument and in which writings?

Anselm in Proslogium

What is the simple basis of Anselm's argument?

God's existence can be deduced from his definition and, once God is correctly defined, there can be no doubt in his existence.

Is Anselm's argument a priori or a posteriori?

A priori - deduction from logic / without sense experience.

Is Anselm's argument deductive or inductive?

Deductive - if the premises are true then the conclusion must be true.

Give a quote from Anselm.

'God is … a being than which nothing greater can be conceived.'

Outline Anselm's argument.

1. God is a being that which nothing greater can be conceived

2. This is a definition which even a fool understands in his mind- even if he does not understand in reality

3. There is a difference between having an idea in the mind and this existing in reality

4. e.g a painter has an idea of what he wants to paint- but only when he has painted it does his idea exist in the mind and reality

5. It is greater to exist in the mind and reality than just in the mind

6. If God only exists in the mind- a greater being could be conceived

7. CONCLUSION: Therefore, in order to be the greatest conceivable being, God must exist in the mind and reality

Who is Anselm referring to when saying 'fool'?

Atheists

What does 'greatest' mean when applied to God?

God is omnipotent, omniscient, etc.

Write a three sentence summary of Anselm's argument.

God is the greatest conceivable being. It is better to exist in the mind and reality. Therefore, as the greatest conceivable being, God must exist in the mind and in reality.

Define necessary truths/things and contingent truths.

• necessary truths/things: proposition that could not have possibly been false / something that could not have possibly failed to exist

• contingent truths/beings: a proposition that happens to be true but might have been otherwise / a thing that does not exist necessarily, so could have failed to exist

What analogy does Gaunilo use in his criticism of Anselm's argument?

'Perfect lost island' - a parody of Anselm's argument

Give Gaunilo's argument.

1. It is possible to conceive of the most perfect and real lost island

2. It is greater to exist in reality than to exist in only the mind

3. Therefore, the most perfect and real island must exist in reality.

What does Gaunilo suggest in his criticism?
What does 'reductio ad absurdum' mean?

• no such 'perfect' island can exist

• argument to absurdity

• Anselm's argument can be used to prove the existence of a countless number of perfect objects

• we can show that a perfect lost island does not exist, so Anselm's argument does not work

How does Anselm refute Gaunilo's criticism?

Anselm makes the distinction between necessary and contingent existence: God's existence vs. the perfect lost island.

Give two key differences between the existence of God and the 'perfect lost island'.

• everything that exists in a perfect lost island is contingent - it will die and is not infinite. God's existence is necessary - for God to possess 'godly' traits, he must be eternal.

• it is impossible to quantify the idea of a perfect island - everyone’s perception of a perfect island is different, whereas we have come to a somewhat satisfactory universal definition of God

Give Anselm's response in full to Gaunilo's criticism.

1. To be perfect, an island would have to be an island 'than which no greater can be conceived'

2. This island would therefore have to exist necessarily- a contingent island would be less perfect

3. But islands are contingent, so cannot exist necessarily

4. The logic of this argument cannot be applied to God
   

   1) God is the greatest conceivable being
   2) The greatest conceivable being cannot be conceived to not exist
   3) God possesses necessary existence

What do Descartes/Anselm claim about God and existence?
Give a quote in support.

'it is a contradiction to think of God lacking existence, as it is to think of a mountain without a valley.

• For God to be the greatest conceivable being, he must exist as it is better to exist in the mind and reality

What is Descartes' definition of God?

He is the 'supremely perfect being'- God must possess all the perfect predicates such as omnipotence, omnibenevolence etc.

What must we be careful of when referring to Kant's criticisms?

They are not directed specifically at Anselm

Summarise Kant's first criticism. Hint: existence + predicate.

Existence is not a real predicate as it adds nothing (new) to the concept of a thing. No knowledge gained.

Give Kant's example in support of his criticism.

• 100 Thalers

• predicates that add knowledge to the coins are: they are round, metallic, and possibly gold…

• saying 'Thalers exist' adds no new information to the coins

Applied to God:

• predicates of God are: omnipotence, omniscience

• saying 'God exists' adds nothing to our concept of God

• the only way to confirm Thalers exist is through sense experience- therefore, the only way we can know for certain God exists in through a posteriori (sense experience)

What is the trouble with Anselm's argument being a priori? (hint: Kant's second objection)

• 'existing necessarily' is part of what we mean by God- but that does not mean he exists in reality

• Anselm's claim 'God exists necessarily' is analytic- true by definition

• e.g, a bachelor is an unmarried man- true by how we define it

• furthermore, 'a unicorn is a horse without a horn'- true by definition

• however, to say 'unicorns exist' and 'bachelors exist' - the only way to be sure of their existence is by experiencing them

• therefore- one can only know if God exists by experiencing him through the senses

• a 'unicorn is a horse without a horn' is true by definition; logically true, but that does not mean there are any unicorns in existence

• it goes for God: ‘God exists necessarily’ is true by definition, however it does not necessarily mean he exists in reality

  • God’s existence cannot be proven by logic

Give two strengths of the Ontological argument.

1. The argument is deductive- if it succeeds, it will count as proof towards God's existence. it does not depend on unreliable sense experience.

2. Karl Barth suggested Anselm's argument is merely a religious experience given by God. Therefore, it holds value to believers.

Give one weaknesses of the Ontological argument.

Some argue an attempt to define God is limiting to him. God is transcendent and beyond our understanding, so defining him could be futile. Aquinas insisted we do not know God's definition.