The Ontological Argument is an argument for the existence of God: it aims to show that belief in the existence of God is rational. It is a priori, meaning that we use our logic and reasoning to understand. The argument is based upon definition and does not need to refer to empirical data to verify it; it is an analytic argument. The proponent argued necessarily leads to the conclusion as it is a deductive argument in which basic premises are stated, if we accept the premises then we have to accept the conclusion. It tries to show that it would be absurd to deny the argument, and to do so would lead to a contradiction (reductio ad absurdam.) If we understand the idea of God, we should see that God must exist in reality.
Anselm proposed the first version of the argument through looking at the term God, once it is understood, God’s existence is shown. Anselms argument can be constructed as such:
Premise 1- ‘God is that than which no greater can be conceived’ (TTW)
Premise 2- It is greater to exist in reality as well as in the mind
Conclusion - ‘Hence there is no doubt there exists a being TTWNGCBC and it exists in reality and in the mind’
‘God’ is an analytic term, just like we know a bachelor implies unmarried male, God implies existence. If God does not exist, it would be as non-sensual as a married bachelor. Anselm says ‘the fool in his heart says there is no God.’ It is greater to exist in reality just like it is greater for a painting to exist in reality than in an artist’s mind. Therefore to be TTW God must exist in reality as well as in the mind. If God does not exist in reality, he is not the greatest being, as anything that exists in the mind and reality is greater, for example human beings. This leads to the conclusion that God exists as for him to be TTW he must exist in reality as well as in the mind. Gaunilo responds to Anselm saying you can define anything into existence, influencing Anselm to develop his argument as God must exist in a special way.
Anselm says that God can either exist contingently, or necessarily. If God exists contingently, and it is greater to exist necessarily then it is possible to think of a being greater than God. This means
P1- TTW
P2- ‘It is greater to never have not existed than to at some point not exist’ – a necessary not contingent existence
C- For God to be TTW, he must have a necessary existence
Descartes proposed the second version of the ontological argument. He claimed that existence was as analytically necessary to God as three sides and three angles adding up to 180 is to a triangle. Existence is the property of a predicate, it describes what belongs to something. For God to be the supremely perfect being he must have existence, for if you list god’s attributes and had God 1 with existence and god 2 without, then God 1 would be more perfect and therefore the correct definition of God. His deductive argument is as follows
P1- Existence is perfection
P2- God is the most perfect being
C- Therefore God exists
Furthermore, he proposed ‘The Trademark Argument’
P1- In my mind I have the concept of a perfect being
P2- As an imperfect being I cannot have conjured up the concept of a perfect being
P3- this concept must have originated from the perfect being itself
P4- A perfect being must exist in order to be perfect
C- therefore a perfect being exists
Plantinga gives the scenario of possible worlds where things might be very different, for example a world where Martin Luther King is white. If God’s existence is necessary, he must exist in all possible words and have all his attributes in each. He argued God is maximally great (has properties in all worlds) and maximally excellent (property in this world.) This leads to the argument:
P1- there exists a world W in which there is a being of maximal greatness. This entails maximal excellence
P2- a being of maximal excellence is omnipotent, omniscient and omnibenevolent in all worlds
C- this is a possible world, therefore God exists
Malcolm concentrates on necessary existence.
P1- God’s existence is impossible or necessary.
P2- God’s existence is not impossible
C- God’s existence is necessary
0 Comment:
Be the first one to comment on this article.