ONTOLOGICAL ARGUMENT FROM
REASON
ANSELM’S DEFINITION OF GOD
“God is that than which nothing greater can be conceived” Proslogian 2
ANSELM’S ARGUMENT
A priori and Deductive
1. BY DEFINITION, God is the best and greatest possible thing I
can imagine
2. It’s better to exist in Mind and Reality than just mind
3. If God is the greatest thing we can think of, the only thing
better is the real thing (Some kind of Super-God)
4. Therefore, God exists.
Believes existence is a Predicate: The very essence of God includes
existence
“Only a fool in his heart says there is no God”
Painter Analogy: The artist who thinks of a beautiful painting in his
head makes it better by actually painting it in real life
God is NECESSARY as there is no possibility of him not existing and
he needs to exist. Used as response to Gaunilo’s criticism as the
Island is contingent. (Proslogian 3)
EXISTENCE AS A PREDICATE
Predicate: Defining characteristics that give the subject a meaning
“Socrates is Bald”- Bald is the predicate
Existence being a predicate means existence is a characteristic of
something
Analytic if you think the very essence of God is existing by definition
Synthetic if you believe God may or may not exist
GAUNILO’S RESPONSE
Used the same line of reasoning as Anselm, but pointed out a fallacy
in reasoning that reduced it to the absurd
Perfect Island analogy: The Ontological argument can be compared
to a Perfect island I can imagine, because it must exist as it would
be less perfect if it did not. It can be extended to any understood
“perfect thing”
You cannot infer the existence of something from just the idea of its
being perfect.
Criticism: An Island has no intrinsic maximum and can Always be
improved, God is necessary and cannot be improved ever.
HUME AND NECESARY BEINGS
Nothing a priori can solve ideas on whether something exists or not
, He believed that existence is not a quality (or perfection), so a
completely perfect being need not exist (linked to teleological
argument)
It is not a contradiction to deny God’s existence NOT a necessary
being.
THOMAS AQUINAS
Anselm’s argument is incorrect as the finite human mind cannot
understand the abstract nature of God
DESCARTES AND PERFECTION
Supported the deductive argument
1. God is supremely Perfect
2. Existence itself is Perfection (or existence is a Predicate of a
perfect being)
3. Example: God without existence is like a triangle without three
sides
4. If Existence is Perfection, and God is a Perfection- God
Must Exist
Triangle example: Existence is God’s essence, in the same way
three sides is to a triangle
KANT’S OBJECTION TO DESCARTES
Critique of Pure Reason
“God exists” cannot be an analytic sentence as analytic statements
work with ideas NOT Reality
All statements about existence must be synthetic
Therefore, existence is not a real predicate, as “existing” does not
add anything to the description
Example: 100 thalers in your mind do not have any additional value
than the ones in real life; the concept is the same
SUPPORT FOR KANT
Frege: There are First and Second Order predicates
1. First order predicates tell us about Nature (the horses are
brown)
2. Second order predicates tell us about Concepts (the horses
are numerous in nature)
3. Therefore, Descartes and Anselm are wrong as they think
existence is First Order not Second
G.E Moore: Agrees existence cannot be used as a predicate as it has
a different function
1. Some tame tigers do not growl
2. Some tame tigers do not exist
3. The second statement is therefore meaningless
REASON
ANSELM’S DEFINITION OF GOD
“God is that than which nothing greater can be conceived” Proslogian 2
ANSELM’S ARGUMENT
A priori and Deductive
1. BY DEFINITION, God is the best and greatest possible thing I
can imagine
2. It’s better to exist in Mind and Reality than just mind
3. If God is the greatest thing we can think of, the only thing
better is the real thing (Some kind of Super-God)
4. Therefore, God exists.
Believes existence is a Predicate: The very essence of God includes
existence
“Only a fool in his heart says there is no God”
Painter Analogy: The artist who thinks of a beautiful painting in his
head makes it better by actually painting it in real life
God is NECESSARY as there is no possibility of him not existing and
he needs to exist. Used as response to Gaunilo’s criticism as the
Island is contingent. (Proslogian 3)
EXISTENCE AS A PREDICATE
Predicate: Defining characteristics that give the subject a meaning
“Socrates is Bald”- Bald is the predicate
Existence being a predicate means existence is a characteristic of
something
Analytic if you think the very essence of God is existing by definition
Synthetic if you believe God may or may not exist
GAUNILO’S RESPONSE
Used the same line of reasoning as Anselm, but pointed out a fallacy
in reasoning that reduced it to the absurd
Perfect Island analogy: The Ontological argument can be compared
to a Perfect island I can imagine, because it must exist as it would
be less perfect if it did not. It can be extended to any understood
“perfect thing”
You cannot infer the existence of something from just the idea of its
being perfect.
Criticism: An Island has no intrinsic maximum and can Always be
improved, God is necessary and cannot be improved ever.
HUME AND NECESARY BEINGS
Nothing a priori can solve ideas on whether something exists or not
, He believed that existence is not a quality (or perfection), so a
completely perfect being need not exist (linked to teleological
argument)
It is not a contradiction to deny God’s existence NOT a necessary
being.
THOMAS AQUINAS
Anselm’s argument is incorrect as the finite human mind cannot
understand the abstract nature of God
DESCARTES AND PERFECTION
Supported the deductive argument
1. God is supremely Perfect
2. Existence itself is Perfection (or existence is a Predicate of a
perfect being)
3. Example: God without existence is like a triangle without three
sides
4. If Existence is Perfection, and God is a Perfection- God
Must Exist
Triangle example: Existence is God’s essence, in the same way
three sides is to a triangle
KANT’S OBJECTION TO DESCARTES
Critique of Pure Reason
“God exists” cannot be an analytic sentence as analytic statements
work with ideas NOT Reality
All statements about existence must be synthetic
Therefore, existence is not a real predicate, as “existing” does not
add anything to the description
Example: 100 thalers in your mind do not have any additional value
than the ones in real life; the concept is the same
SUPPORT FOR KANT
Frege: There are First and Second Order predicates
1. First order predicates tell us about Nature (the horses are
brown)
2. Second order predicates tell us about Concepts (the horses
are numerous in nature)
3. Therefore, Descartes and Anselm are wrong as they think
existence is First Order not Second
G.E Moore: Agrees existence cannot be used as a predicate as it has
a different function
1. Some tame tigers do not growl
2. Some tame tigers do not exist
3. The second statement is therefore meaningless
