Pop Quiz - Questions 

1) What does Ontos mean? Being / nature

2) How does this argument work? Defines what is meant by the term God

3) Who is the main proponent? Anselm

4) How did he define God? As the greatest being imaginable

5) Is this an a priori or a posteriori argument? A priori

6) What does de re mean? In the mind

7) What does De dicto mean? In reality

8.) What is the definition or main tenet of this argument? God must exist because it is illogical for Him not to exist / If God is the perfect being if He did not exist then He would not be perfect.

9) Whose idea was the perfect island? Gaunilo

10) What was his point? That he could imagine a perfect island but that didn’t mean it existed

11) What other examples can you think of, of things which exist only in the mind? Unicorns, dragons, fairies

12) What is the difference between them and God? He is a necessary being.

13) Where do our ideas of perfection come from? The mind of God

14) What was Plato’s example of this? The cave

15) Whose analogy was the triangle? Descartes

16) What was his point? That if you imagine a triangle it has to have three angles and three sides to be a triangle, so too with god, to be God He must exist.

17) Whose idea was alternative universes? Plantinga

18) What was his point? In an infinite universe everything must be possible somewhere, but if God is possible somewhere then He must be everywhere

19) What’s wrong with a priori arguments? No evidence and they rely on agreeing on the meanings of terms.

20) What are the main problems with this argument? Circular logic / still no proof / you can follow he logic and agree with the premises but still not believe that God exists, only that the argument is logical!

Questions and Answers 

1.        What is an Inductive reasoning?

• Inductive reasoning is where the premises support the conclusion, but they do not entail it. It is usually based upon information coming from the senses (the order and complexity we observe with our eyes). 

2.        What is a Deductive reasoning?

• Reasoning which if we accept the premise (starting point) of an argument is true, therefore the conclusion must be true.  The premises of an argument do entail the conclusion, i.e. the conclusion is necessary e.g. 1+1=2..

3.        What does Qua mean?

A Latin word meaning 'as relating to'

4.        What is a predicate?

A grammatical term that refers to the description of a concept

5.        What is necessary existence?

existence which does not depend on anything else

6.        What is a synthetic statement/proposition?

statements/propositions are those whose truth or falsity are determined by sense experience

7.        What is a A Posteriori Argument?

 An argument which starts with human experience then builds up evidence to lead to a probable conclusion

8.        What is a A Priori Argument?

The conclusion is the logical result of the premise. E.g.

·         P1 God is that than which nothing greater can be conceived

·         P2 That than which nothing greater than can be conceived must exist

·         P3 God must exist

9.        What are characteristics of a priori arguments? (3)

Analytic proof, the conclusion is contained in the premises

The premises and conclusion need no external evidence or experience

The premises move towards a logically necessary conclusion

10.    What is the strength of a priori arguments?

Logically necessary conclusions, provided in the premises, are analytically true meaning the conclusion is not open to doubt.

11.    Who is Anselm? (5)

1033-1109

Archbishop of Canterbury

He never doubted the existence of God

His ontological argument in his book 'Proslogion' is a response to the fool in Psalm 14 in the Bible who says to himself 'There is no God'

He believes God is 'a being than which nothing greater can be conceived'

12.    What are the weaknesses of a priori arguments? (4)

Leads to only apparently logically necessary conclusions

Depends on whether we accept the premises are analytically true

Can only say that if there is a God, we might be able to make certain claims about him, since we do not know that God exists, or what God is like such claims will need to be verified using empirical evidence

Conceptual or theoretical, therefore may need empirical proof to test whether any claims are true or false

13.    What does Anselm mean by 'I do not seek to understand so that I may believe, but I believe in order to understand'? (2)

He is putting his faith in God to understand God rather than understanding God to put his faith in God

'faith seeking a deeper understanding of Gods nature'

14.    What is Anselms painter analogy

If a painter preconceives an idea for a work of art, the finished product will always be superior to the idea of it alone

15.    How does the ontological argument differ from other classical arguments for the existence of God? (3)

The ontological argument differs from all other theistic proofs because it is a priori

Others are a posteriori

Start from some feature of the world (inexperience) to prove Gods experience

16.    What is Anselm's first ontological argument? (5)

God is the greatest possible being (nothing greater can be imagined)

If God exists in the mind alone (in intellectu), then a greater being could be imagined to exist in both the mind and reality (de re)

This being would then be greater than God

Thus God cannot exist only as an idea in the mind

Therefore God exists in both the mind (in intellectu) and in reality (de re)

17.    Where does ontological originate from?

Two Greek words 'ontos' (being) and 'logos' (study of)   (Kant invented the term)

18.    What was Anselms 1srts the Ontomological argument?

•      Premise: God is the greatest possible being (nothing greater can be imagined)  

•      Premise: If God exists in the mind alone (in intellectu), then a greater being could be imagined to exist in both the mind and reality (de re) .

•      Premise: This being would then be greater than God .

•      Premise: Thus God cannot exist only as an idea in the mind

•      Conclusion: Therefore God exists in both the mind (in intellectu) and in reality (de re)

19.    What is Anselm's argument a reply to? (3)

The fool in the bible who says there is no God

For the fool to say 'there is no God' the fool has to have an idea in their mind of what God 'is'.

Anselm defines this as the greatest being and for the fool to know God is the greatest being but deny his existence means he is a fool

20.    What does Anselm say about existence?

'Hence there is no doubt that there exists are being, than which nothing greater can be conceived and it exists both in understanding and in reality'

21.    Why does Anselm argue that God's existence is logically necessary? (4)

It is self-contradictory to be able to imagine God as the greatest possible being and yet to deny his existence

Existence is a predicate

To Anselm 'God exists' is analytic

22.    What does Anselm use to reach his conclusion?

Anselm uses reason, not experience, to reach his conclusion that God must exist by definition

23.    What are strengths of Anselm's argument? (2)

It is an a priori argument therefore it does not need evidence as senses can be tricked

It would be contradictory to argue 'God is the greatest being' then to deny he even exists

24.   What are weaknesses of Anselm's argument? (5)

What does reality mean, experiential or world of ideas

Is existing in reality greater than existing in understanding

Lack of empirical proof - logical fallacy

God is not an object of proof, faith does not rely on evidence (Kant)

Circular argument - no matter how you define God it begs the question whether he exists

25.    Who is Gaunilo? (3)

Benedictine monk in the 11th Century, known for his response to St Anselm in his book 'In Behalf of the Fool). He never doubted the existence of God but thought Anselm's argument was flawed

26. Why did Gaunilo reject Anselm's deductive argument? (5)

He believed in God but rejected Anselm's deductive argument because we can use it to define anything into existence provided it has the property of being the 'greatest;

God's real existence is doubtful without empirical proof

The fool may have lots of things in mind that do nor exist in reality e.g. gossip

We can imagine the greatest imaginable island but it is absurd to conclude it exists in reality as you cannot define things into existence

There is some intellectual slight of hand in moving from a definition to proving a factual existence of something

27.    What is Gaunilos analogy from Gossip?

Gossip is unreliable - we don't know what is true.

The Fool could make up all sorts of things in his head that do not exist in reality. When you listen to people talking about others - is what they are saying true?

28.    What does Gaunilo do in response to Anselm's 1st Formulation?

He devises an argumentum ad absurdum.

29.    What did Gaunilo say about God?

'Of God, or a being greater than all others, I could not conceive at all, except merely according to the word. An object can hardly or never be conceived according to the word alone'

30.    What did Guanilo say about the island?

'If a man should try to prove to me by such reasoning that this island truly exists, and that its existence should no longer be doubted, either I should believe that he was jesting, or I know not which I ought ti regard myself as the greater fool: myself or him'

31.    What is Gaunilo's Argument?

P1 - The perfect island I can conceive of is TTWNGCBC.

P2 - Formal E>Internal E.

P3 - Thus, the perfect island exists both F/E.

32.    What was Anselm's reply to the island analogy? (3)

An island doesn't have an eternal exist as we can visualise it 'having a beginning and an end and composed of parts' (Anselm).

By contrast God is unique, eternal and a necessary being.

He says that if you conceive the greatest possible being, you 'conceive of a being which cannot be even conceived to not exist' whereas you can easily conceive the island to not exist

33.    What did Alvin Platinga suggest Anselm could also reply to Gaunilo?

'The qualities that make for greatness of an island... have no intrinsic maximum... So the idea of a greatest possible island is an inconsistent and incoherent idea'

34.    What is Anselm's second argument? (5)

Premise: God is the greatest being imaginable - TTWNGCBC.

Premise: It is greater to be a necessary being than a contingent being

Premise: If God only exists as a contingent being, he can be imagined to not exist, then a greater being could be imagined that cannot not exist

Premise: This being would be greater than God

Conclusion: Therefore, God is a necessary being and must exist in reality (de re)

35.    What does Anselm mean by his second argument?

God must necessarily exist because if God existed only contingently, God would depend on something else for existence and this necessary being would be greater than God, therefore God must exist.

36.    What is the issue with Anselm's 2nd Formulation?

As Aquinas notes, God's existence cannot be regarded as self-evident.

EG. The statement 'Truth Exists' is self-evident as you cannot accept the truth of the statement without accepting that truth exists.

HW// It is possible to imagine the non-existence of God without contradiction.

Thus, for Aquinas, the notion that God exists necessarily is illogical.

37.   What did Peter Van Inwagen think of Anselm's second argument?

'The interesting thing about this argument was that it claimed to show that the non-existence of God was impossible, owing to the fact that any assertion of non-existence of God must be self-contradictory' 1993

38.    

What does Malcolm think of Anselm's second argument?

He rejects the first argument but supports the second argument as he believes that if God does not already exist, he cannot come into existence since this would require a cause and make him a limited being

39.    How does Peter Vardy attempt to defend TOA?

He views it as an anti-realist argument.

Rather, Vardy claims that TOA does prove God's existence logically, but it is only understood by those within the religious community.

Similarly, whilst prime numbers do not exist in reality, once you understand their meaning, they become real for you.

Thus, when you understand what believers mean when they speak of God's necessary existence, such an idea becomes understandable for you.

40.    But, what is a flaw with Vardy's defence?

Contrary to Anselm's claim, not everybody accepts his definition of God.

It is only those with an identical conception of God for whom the argument is a proof.

Thus, an anti-realist interpretation of TOA cannot be deemed an objective proof.

41.    What are the weaknesses of Anselm's second argument? (2)

Existence is not a predicate

The concept of a necessary being still lacks empirical proof as it is still only a concept which can be rejected all together

42.    What does Thomas Aquinas reject Anselm's arguments?

Human beings are not in position to understand God's nature, hence they cannot know that 'God exists' is an analytic statement

43.    Why is Anselm's argument not proof of God's existence?

Anselm does not think that God's existence is a matter of debate, instead he is demonstrating what is true.

44.    Who was Descartes and what did he believe? (3)

In his earlier work, Meditation 3, he believed that God has stamped the idea of God into every person

The truth of God's existence, like the truth of mathematics cannot be doubted once it has been clearly demonstrated

Demonstrating God's existence is not about proving God exists but showing there is no reason to doubt his existence

45.    What is Descartes version of the ontological argument?

P1 God is supremely perfect, existence is a necessary attribute of perfection, therefore God exists

P2 Existence is a necessary property of perfection.- 'God is perfect' is analytic - a logically necessary truth, you cannot think God without thinking his existence 

P3 God's nature is immutable (unchanging)

P3 - Thus, God must exist necessarily.

46.    What is Descartes triangle analogy and what is he trying to demonstrate? (2)

It is logically necessary that every triangle must have 3 sides and 3 angles

Similarly if you study God carefully it is clear that the perfection of existence is part of the way God is, necessarily

47.    Why is Descartes' argument plausible?

Because it is better for God to exist than to not.

Rather, existence is indeed a perfection.

This is because a God who exists is capable of various divine acts such as creation, response to prayer and the ability to perform miracles.

FM// A God who exists independently of the mind is inherently of greater perfection, as he does not rely on another being for its existence.

48.    How does Descartes attempt to illustrate the necessary existence of God?

He states that the necessity of God's existence cannot be separated from God anymore than having three sides can be separated from the concept of a triangle.

49.    What is Kant's objection to Descartes triangle analogy?

Kant puts forward two criticism to Descartes TOA: God has necessary existence is a flawed statement. And Existence is not a predicate. This is focused on the second- Kant agreed that by definition a three sided figure must be a triangle, but pointed out that if you don't have a triangle in the first place then it won't have three sides anyway 'To posit a triangle, and yet to reject its three angles, is self-contradictory; but there is no contradicting in rejecting the triangle together with its three angles'

50.    Why does Kant claim that God's existence isn't logically necessary? (5)

Kant agreed that by definition a triangle has three sides, but a triangle is a manmade concept He argued if you believe in God then it is logical to believe his existence is necessary, however the fact that you can define something in an analytic way doesn't make it real

We have no clear idea what is meant by 'necessary being'

Logically possible things may not be ontologically possible (exist outside the mind)

The only sort of necessary is found in grammar or mathematics

51.    

Why does Kant claim existence is not a predicate? (3)

One can have an idea of what a unicorn is, however that does not mean it exists in reality

For Kant, all philosophical statements or propositions about existence are synthetic and need to be verified as true or false

The word 'exist' is not a predicate and a concept is not made any greater by adding the word existence 

Kant is stating that we cannot conclude God's existence from asserting that God exists.  This is because the property of existence does not add or detract from a concept.

52.    

What is for Kant is the difference between a logical and a real predicate?

Logical Predicate- a word placed in the predicate position of a sentence (that is after the subject) i.e. The cat (subject)is brown (predicate)

Real Predicate - is something that 'determines a thing' or 'is added to' our concept of a subject

53.    

How does Kant illustrate this?

Kant offers the example of 100 thalers.

He notes that there is no conceptual existence between 100 possible and 100 real thalers.

54.    

Why does Hartsone disagree with Kant?

He pointed out 'the conceptual description of a kind of thing may at most account for so much of its quality or value as its expressible in merely abstract terms. But the full quality is not thus expressible' there is a big difference between an idea of God and God existing in reality as well

55.    Why does Malcolm disagree with Kant?

Malcolm has suggested that necessary existence could be a predicate of God and argues that the existence of God is either impossible or necessary

56.    What did Pierre Gassendi reply to Descartes?

If something like a unicorn, Yeti or God does not exist, then these things are neither perfect nor imperfect; they just do not exist

57.    What did Descartes reply to Gassendi?

He replied that existence is necessarily part of the nature of God and 'the relation between existence and essence is manifestly quire different in the case of God from what it is in the case of triangle' the essence of God is to exist.

58.    What is Kant's 2nd objection? And how does this relate to Descartes' Triangle?

That all existential statements are synthetic. Although it is necessarily true for a triangle to have three sides, it is only if the triangle exists is this necessarily true. Russell echo this when he states that the notion of 'necessary existence' can only be applied to analytic statements - not ontological ones.

59.    Who is Alvin Plantinga and what was his argument

Possible worlds theory: Effectively, then MAXIMAL GREATNESS means MAXIMAL EXCELLENCE in every possible world...

P1) It is possible that there be a being that has maximal greatness.

P2) So there is a possible being that in one world W had maximal greatness.

P3) A being has maximal greatness in a given world only if it has maximal excellence in every world.

P4) A being has maximal excellence in a given world only if it has omniscience, omnipotence and

moral perfection in that world.

C) Therefore, it is necessarily true that an omniscient, omnipotent and perfectly good being exists: God.

60.    How did Peter Van Inwagen challenge Plantinga’s Modal Ontological argument?

The No-Know argument

P1 There is a No-Know on some possible world- who has no knowledge of Gods necessary existence

P2 If there is a No-Know on some possible world God cannot exist in every possible world

C Gods existence cannot be necessary

Challenege Questions - Take it Further!

FOR THE ANSWERS TO THE QUESTIONS, SCROLL DOWN TO THE END OF THIS BLOG ENTRY.

1. Which of the following philosophers is NOT responsible for formulating a version of the ontological argument?

a. Kant

b. Descartes

c. Anselm

d. Plantinga

2. Which of the following philosophers was the first to use the term ‘ontological’ when writing about this particular argument?

a. Anselm

b. Gaunilo

c. Descartes

d. Kant

3. TRUE or FALSE?  A proposition is knowable a priori if it is knowable entirely through theory or pure logic, while a proposition is knowable a posteriori if it is knowable on the basis of experience or observation. 

4. Which of the following is an a priori statement?

a. One plus one equals two.

b. There are two members of the synth-pop group Pet Shop Boys..

5. Which of the following is an analytic statement?

a. All spinsters are unmarried women.

b. Kylie Minogue is a spinster.

6. TRUE or FALSE? The conclusion of a deductive argument is merely probable.

7. TRUE or FALSE? An a posteriori/synthetic statement is potentially falsifiable.

8. TRUE or FALSE? A distinctive feature of ontological arguments for the existence of God is that they are a priori, analytic and deductive in character.

9. TRUE or FALSE? Anselm argued that as the greatest conceivable being, God can only exist in our understanding.

10. TRUE or FALSE? The term ‘aseity’ is often used to refer to the belief that God contains within himself the cause of himself, is the first cause, or rather is simply uncaused. In other words, He is a necessarily self-existent, entirely independent being.

11. TRUE or FALSE? Gaunilo compared Anselm’s notion of God as the most perfect being that can be imagined with the example of a perfect island, arguing that although we may be able to imagine such an island, just because it is perfect does not mean that it actually exists.

12. TRUE or FALSE? Anselm rejected Gaunilo’s comparison on the basis that even though a perfect island is something infinite like God, it is also contingent, whereas God is a being who is both infinite and necessarily existent, so that one cannot conceive of God not existing in the way that one might imagine a perfect island eventually ceasing to exist.

13. TRUE or FALSE? Aquinas criticised Anselm’s proof on that the basis that while a being than which no greater can be thought may indeed exist, such a being may not be like the God of Christianity.

14. TRUE or FALSE? In Descartes’ later version of the ontological argument, existence is not understood to be one of his many perfect attributes and is set apart from them.

15. TRUE or FALSE? Unlike Anselm’s version of the argument, Descartes’ proof is relational in the sense that it depends on a comparison between something that exists in the mind only and something that exists both in the mind and in reality.

16. TRUE or FALSE? Both Anselm and Descartes incorporate the aforementioned concept of aseity, the notion of God as a necessarily existent, independent being, into their versions of the ontological argument.

17. TRUE or FALSE? Both Kant and Russell argued in different ways that existence cannot be a genuine attribute or property (a predicate) of God because it does not add anything meaningful to the description of Him.

18. TRUE or FALSE? Frederick Copleston responded to Kant’s criticism by arguing even if we accept that existence is not a predicate, necessary existence does seem to be, as necessary existence is an attribute that makes God unique and that distinguishes Him from ordinary existent beings. In which case necessary existence is a distinctive property of God that does add something to our conception of Him.

19. TRUE or FALSE? A strength of the ontological proof is that if it is valid, it can lend additional support to the Cosmological argument because the built-in notion of aseity could also help to explain why God might also be the causeless cause of the universe.

20. TRUE or FALSE? A further strength of the ontological argument could be said to be the fact that it has convinced many of those that have studied it that God exists.

ANSWERS

1. a

2. d

3. True

4. a

5. b

6. False – the conclusion to an inductive argument is probable while the conclusion to a deductive argument follows inevitably from the premises.

7. True

8. True

9. False – for Anselm, to be the greatest conceivable being, that being must exist in both the understanding (i.e. our imagination) AND in reality.

10. True

11. True

12. False – a perfect island is both finite and contingent, whereas God is neither.

13. False – Aquinas’s criticism was different. According to Aquinas, humans have a limited intellect and it is impossible for them to understand or define the nature of God. Anselm is therefore overstepping the mark when he claims to know that God is the greatest conceivable being because if we cannot get our heads around the idea of God in the first place then we are not in a position to work out what the consequences of the idea of God might be.

14. False – for Descartes, God possesses all perfections as divine properties or attributes. Existence is one such perfection.

15. False – Anselm’s proof is relational in the sense described in the question. Descartes makes no such comparison. His version simply states that God is a perfect being.

16. True – Anselm does this in Proslogion III and Descartes’ assertion that existence is a perfection is usually taken to mean that God is necessarily self-existent.

17. True

18. False – Norman Malcolm came up with this response. Also, do not forget that both Kant and Hume were critical of the notion of ‘necessary existence’.

19. True

20. False – it has not produced many converts, though it could be said that the fact that there is still a lack of consensus among philosophers and theologians as to why it is flawed even after all this time, and that it still enjoys some support from modern logicians like Kurt Gödel, suggests that it is still relevant when it comes to contemporary debates about God’s existence.