The Ontological Argument

Question 1

Who proposed the ontological argument

Answer 1

Anselm

Question 2

Is the ontological argument deductive or inductive

Answer 2

Deductive

Question 3

What kind of knowledge is the ontological argument base on

Answer 3

Priori knowledge(based on definition and logic alone)

Question 4

What did anselm believe about atheists

Answer 4

Atheism was self delusion and in order to live a corrupt life

Question 5

What does anslem argue about the mind

Answer 5

Just because something exists in the mind doesn’t mean it exists in real life

Question 6

What is a criticism of the ontological argument

Answer 6

Gaunillos argument

Question 7

What does Gaunillos argument state

Answer 7

You can imagine a perfect island,but the island doesn’t necessarily exist
If anselms argument can be used to prove the existence of a non existent island then it’s flawed

Question 8

What is reductioabsurdum

Answer 8

A reduction which is absurd. Shows the denial of the conclusion which leads to contradiction

Question 9

What were Anselm’s responses to Gualino

Answer 9

1. We can’t compare a contingent being to a non contingent being(God to an island)
2. An island doesn’t have God’s eternal presence because God is necessary and unique

Question 10

What kind of argument is the ontological argument

Answer 10

A priori

Question 11

What kind of object did descartes use to argue the existence of God

Answer 11

A triangle

Question 12

What was Descartes argument for the existence of God

Answer 12

1. A triangle has 3 sides and wouldn’t be a triangle without the 3 sides
   2.God is a perfect being,existence is part of the definition of perfection therefore God exists

Question 13

What was Kant’s critiques of Descartes

Answer 13

1. Existence isn’t a characteristic
2. Adding the predicate ‘ exists ‘ doesn’t increase monetary value

Question 14

Give the supporting points for this question: ‘A priori arguments can never prove God ‘s existence [30]

Answer 14

1. Atheists and agnostics may not believe in the premises of the ontological argument and therefore may not believe in the conclusion
   2.God is transcendent and he is outside of our realm meaning that our logic can be flawed

Question 15

Give the against points for this question: ‘A priori arguments can never prove God ‘s existence [30]

Answer 15

1. A priori is more logical and is based on reasoning,deductive
   2.There is no inductive leap so there is no other conclusion that can be reached
2. A posteriori argument cannot be applied to God as you cannot observe nature(something that is contingent) and poly it to a non contingent being such as God