Proving God's existence (ontological)

Question 1

Introduction?

Answer 1

The ontological argument attempts to argue for God without reference to sense experience
- God’s existence or non-existence is a huge talking point within philosophy of religion
-The argument was proposed by Anselm in his works ‘Proslogion’, which consists of prayers, it is 26 chapters long but chapters 2 and 3 are the
most relevant here.
- trying to say that if you understand the definition of God, then you understand God exists

Question 2

who was Anselm and his points?

Answer 2

a monk who later became the Archbishop of Canterbury. He was writing at a time when most people believed in God
- the starting point for Anselm is the fool of the Psalms
- Anselm’s point is that atheists know what they are rejecting – they
understand God because they have to understand God to say he doesn’t exist

Question 3

what is explained in chapter 2?

Answer 3

the idea that reality is greater than our minds Anselm uses the example of a painter who has the idea of a painting in his mind,But the painting is greater once it has been painted because it actually exists now and not just in the mind of the painter
- so it is greater to exist in both the mind and in reality, than in the mind alone

Question 4

why does Anselm create the idea of the fool?

Answer 4

-Anselm says that the fool (the atheist from Psalms) would agree with his definition of God, ‘that than which nothing greater can be conceived’,
so has the concept of God in his mind
-so there is a universal idea of what God is even if people don’t believe in God
- if the greatest thing is real then God as the greatest must exist In reality
- something than which nothing greater can be thought

Question 5

what acronym can be used to prove God’s existence?

Answer 5

TTWNGCBC - ‘than that which nothing greater can be conceived,’

Question 6

what is explained in chapter 3?

Answer 6

Concerns the first quality of God that it’s not even possible for him to thought to not exist,God is a necessary being, a being that has to exist and cannot exist

Question 7

How does Anselm + Boethius argue God’s necessity

Answer 7

Boethius believes that everything must fall into at least one of four categories:
- possible to be (contingent)
- possible not to be (contingent)
- not possible to be
- not possible not to be (this is where only God belongs)
Anslem’s not saying because I think of God he must exist instead he’s saying it is when I think of him I realise the necessity of God’s existence.Existence imposes itself on my thoughts - rather than my thoughts imposing existence of God’

Question 8

how does Anselm explain Gods necessity?

Answer 8

• necessary (can’t not exist) beings are better than contingent (can not exist) beings
• if God is a necessary being than he cannot not exist

Question 9

Gaunilo’s criticism?

Answer 9

• argues that Anselm’s theory was an exercise of wishful thinking, in that it permitted anything to be thought into existence
• Gaunilo was a believer as much as Anselm he was simply testing wether Anselm’s argument was philosophically sound
• in his in behalf of the fool he puts himself in the position of a rational non-believer, the mythical Lost island which was considered to be perfect
• if the perfect island didn’t exist it would be a contradiction to call it the perfect island, for the perfect island must by definition exist
• Gaunilo asks his readers to look at the evidence of the world
• supported by Dawkins, In his book The God Delusion he uses the argument from improbability to argue that it is extremely unlikely for a God to exist

Question 10

Anselm’s response to Gaunilo?

Answer 10

Anselm pointed out that an island is contingent, it depends on things like sea and earth - Islands do not have to exist,so their existence cannot be necessary, Anselm argues that God is supremely necessary so the argument applies to him alone
- Hick, a perfect island does not make sense, if one more grain of sand was added would it no longer be perfect

Question 11

what does Anselm say about God’s necessity?

Answer 11

• talks about being that can be thought not to exist (contingent beings) and beings that cannot not exist (necessary beings)
• Necessary beings > contingent beings so God must be a necessary being so he cannot not exist
• Descartes questions whether this existence can be used as a predicate

Question 12

Kant’s critique of the ontological argument?

Answer 12

Kant argues that existence is not a precipitate at all as it doesn’t add a description of God
- but Malcom argues that Kant’s argument is misleading, since the question is not whether existence is a predicate but whether necessary existence is a predicate