Formal arguments Flashcards
What is St. Anselm’s formal ontological argument?
P1: God is defined as the greatest possible being.
P2: Even an atheist can conceive God as the greatest possible being.
P3: It is greater to exist in the understanding and reality than simply in the understanding alone.
C: Therefore, the greatest possible being, God, must exist in the understanding and in reality.
What is Arthur Schopenhauer’s formal criticism of St. Anselm’s formal ontological argument?
P1: X is the greatest possible Y.
P2: It is greater to exist in reality and in the understanding.
C: Therefore, X, (If it is the greatest possible Y) must exist in reality.
What is Descartes’ formal ontological argument?
P1: I have an idea of God.
P2: A supremely perfect being must have all perfections.
P3: Existence is a perfection.
C: Therefore God exists.
What is Norman Malcom’s formal ontological argument? (Long)
P1: God cannot come into existence.
P2: Then if God does not exist, then his existence is impossible.
P3: God cannot cease to exist.
P4: So, if God does exist, then his existence is necessary.
C1: Therefore, God’s existence is either impossible, or necesary.
P5: Something’s existence is impossible if it is self-contradictory.
P6: God’s existence is not self-contradictory.
P7: Therefore, God’s existene is not impossible.
C2: Therefore, God’s existence is necessary, and God necessarily exists.
How does Hick’s simplification of Malcom’s formal ontological argument reveal a flaw?
P1: God’s existence is either impossible or necessary.
P2: God’s existence is not logically impossible. (Because its denal is not self-contradictory.)
C: Therefore, God exists as an ontologically necessary being.
What is Gaunilo’s formal ‘perfect island’ objection to ontological arguments? (Aimed at St. Anelm’s argument?)
P1: There is a lost island which is the most excellent of all islands.
P2: No one has difficulty concieving this lost and incredible island. (It exists in our understanding)
P3: It is more excellent for it to exist in reality and understanding rather than in understanding alone.
C: Therefore the lost island must exist.
What is Hume’s objection to ontological arguments concerning the contradictory nature of statements?
P1: Nothing that can be distinctly conceived entails a contradiction.
P2: For any being that we conceive of as existent, we can also distinctly conceive of that being as non-existent.
C: Therefore, there isn’t any being who’s non-existence entails a contradiction.
What is Ayer’s objection to ontological arguments?
P1: A priori statements are certain because they are tautologies.
P2: From a set of tautologies only further tautologies can be validly deduced.
P3: The existence of anything is not a tautology.
C: Therefore, we cannot validly deduce the existence of God from an a priori proposition, and the ontological argument fails.
What is Kant’s objection to the ontological argument based one existence not being a predicate?
P1: A genune predicate adds to our conception of a subject, and helps to determine it.
P2: ‘Existence’ does not add to our conception of a subject, or help to determine it.
C: Therefore, existence is not a genuine predicate.
