Zusammenfassung der Ressource
The Ontological Arguement
- Its doesn't start
from
experience
- Claims to arrive at
the existence of
God
- If the arguement succeeds, the
existence of God is logically
necessary
- Posteriori and priori
- Posteriori statements rely
on external evidence e.g. Boys in year 11 do better than boys in year 10
- Priori statements don't rely
on externals (facts) to be
worked out e.g. The prime
minster is a man. Uses logic to work out
- Analytic and synthetic
- Analytic statements are necessarily
true because of the statement e.g.
Grass takes in sunlight. Grass is a
plant and plants take in sunlight
- Synthetic statements which are
true because of the evidence but
you need edvience to work it out
e.g. The Grass is green. This is true
but the grass can come in yellow
or you may be colour blind
- The problem is that the question God
exists can be an analytic or synthetic
statement
- St Anselm
- He used an a priori argument
to conclude the existence of
God
- Argues simiply from the concept of God for the existence of God
- The prosologion
- God is "a being
which nothing
greater can be
conceived"
- God exists at least in the mind
and understanding (de dicto)
whether someone belives in him
or not
- 'And the fool hath said in his
heart "there is not God"' Psalm
14:1
- Something that
exists in reality
(dere) is superior
then in the mind
- The painter analogy
- Something is better in real life than in the mind
- If God only exists in the
mind, he isn't the
greatest being
- God must exist in the mind
as well as reality in order to
be logically consistent with our definition
- Existing makes it the greatest than in the mind
- The painter's finished
project will be better in real
life than in the mind
- Benedictine monk that would
become the archbishop of
canterbury
- There's a debate if whether he intended his ontological
arguement to conclusively prove the existence of God or
whether he was simply seeking to demonstrate the
rationality of faith
- Ontos means being + logos (
words and knowledge) arguing
the existence of God from
knowledge
- On behalf of the fool. Pity the fool.
- One of the criticisms of Anselm's ontological arguement- Gaunilo
- The fool can have all kinds of made-up things in his head
- Gossip for instances can be seen as
unrealieable- how can the fool discern what
is true and false
- Can't define things into existence
- The perfet island
- Even when there is a perfet
island. There can be more
out there
- They must all be sound
- Need to figure out the right and wrong
- Anselm augred that you couldn't compare God to an island
- An island must be
caused to exist by
something and that
thing is God
- God cannot
thought not to
exist
- A being you can
imageine not to
exist. E.g a yeti
- If you exist, you are greater than a yeti
- Existence is a predicate of God
cit's a property or quality of
God's nature
- A predicate is the main
properties or qualties or
something e.g. all cats have
four legs, tail, paws,
whiskers etc.
- Rene Descartes
- "I think there for I am"
the concept of if you
think, you exist.
- If a triangle never existed.
We'll still know it has
three sides by looking at
the name of the shape
- Part one
- God exists as a idea in the mind
- God is a supremely perfect being
- Relying on innate idea of God, people possess
- The less they can do they
[God's characteristices] appear
capable of proceeding from me
alone
- We must conclude God exists
- God necessarily exists because
that's where our idea of God
came from as a imperfect
being. We can't develop that idea.
- His senses wouldn't
derive those propeties as
clearly and distinctly as
his mind
- Part two
- Existence is a predicate of God
- As superemely perfect being. God must
posses existence otherwise that being is
not perfect
- God must exist in reality
- God must exist as existence
is predicateof supremely
perfect being
- God without existence
is the same of thinking
of mountains without
a valley
- The mind cannot conceive of perfection without also
conceiving of existence
- Weaknesses
- Kant states that if say something
about X. You're aren't telling anyone
about X
- The Predicate must give
us information about X
and not say that X exists
- E.g. A triangle exists but
there's no information on
a triangle
- God cannot be
an exception to
the rule since
this is a priori
statement
- This is a paradox
- The property that doesn't tell us that X exists
- Aquinas states that people can
have different concepts of God
and defining God
- "It doesn't therefore follow that he
understands what the word signifies exist
actually, but only that it exists mentaly"
- Strengths
- The premises move
logically to a conclusion
which is contained in the
premises themselves
- Supports modern versions as it can
adapted into modern times
- It's analytic as God implies
existence and God's existence
is logically necessary
- The conclusion that God
exists due to him being
"nothing greater can be
conceived"
- Requires experience
- Moves logicaly to a conclusion