The Ontological Argument
The ontological argument is:
- A priori (knowledge prior to experience; relies on logical deduction and not on
sense experience).
- Deductive (rather than being probabilistic, it assumes that the conclusion must
be true if the premises are true).
- Analytic.
Synthetic statement = truth or falsity is determined by sense experience
Analytic statement = true by the meaning of the words used (true by definition)
Subject = who/what the sentence is about
Predicate = gives information about the subject
Necessary truths = statements that could not possibly be false
Necessary things = things that cannot possibly fail to exist
The ontological argument is based on a definition of the word ‘God’.
It claims that, if you understand ‘God’ in terms of that definition, then it is logical
to conclude that God exists and that his existence is not just possible/probable,
but necessary and analytically true.
‘Ontological’ comes from the Greek word ‘ontos’, which means ‘being’.
The OA argues that its conclusion is self-evidently true and logically necessary.
St. Anselm of Canterbury (1033 – 1109):
1078: Anselm wrote his ‘Proslogium’. He felt that we can combine faith and
reason to come to some understanding of God. An a priori argument has its basis
in thought – it is one that is based upon logic and reasoning rather than
experience.
“I began to ask myself whether one might be able to find a specific argument
needing no proof beyond itself which would suffice by itself to link together such
conclusions as that God truly exists, that he is the highest good – needing no
other but needed for the existence and wellbeing of all else – and whatever else
we believe to be true of the divine being” (Anselm).
Anselm has 2 versions of the argument:
1: From ‘Proslogium chapter 2’; this takes the form of a prayer in which Anselm
considers the ‘fool’ in Psalm 14 who claims there is no God (‘the fool says in his
heart, “There is no God”’):
P1: God is a being ‘that than which nothing greater can be conceived’.
P2: The atheist understands this definition even if he does not understand that
God exists.
The ontological argument is:
- A priori (knowledge prior to experience; relies on logical deduction and not on
sense experience).
- Deductive (rather than being probabilistic, it assumes that the conclusion must
be true if the premises are true).
- Analytic.
Synthetic statement = truth or falsity is determined by sense experience
Analytic statement = true by the meaning of the words used (true by definition)
Subject = who/what the sentence is about
Predicate = gives information about the subject
Necessary truths = statements that could not possibly be false
Necessary things = things that cannot possibly fail to exist
The ontological argument is based on a definition of the word ‘God’.
It claims that, if you understand ‘God’ in terms of that definition, then it is logical
to conclude that God exists and that his existence is not just possible/probable,
but necessary and analytically true.
‘Ontological’ comes from the Greek word ‘ontos’, which means ‘being’.
The OA argues that its conclusion is self-evidently true and logically necessary.
St. Anselm of Canterbury (1033 – 1109):
1078: Anselm wrote his ‘Proslogium’. He felt that we can combine faith and
reason to come to some understanding of God. An a priori argument has its basis
in thought – it is one that is based upon logic and reasoning rather than
experience.
“I began to ask myself whether one might be able to find a specific argument
needing no proof beyond itself which would suffice by itself to link together such
conclusions as that God truly exists, that he is the highest good – needing no
other but needed for the existence and wellbeing of all else – and whatever else
we believe to be true of the divine being” (Anselm).
Anselm has 2 versions of the argument:
1: From ‘Proslogium chapter 2’; this takes the form of a prayer in which Anselm
considers the ‘fool’ in Psalm 14 who claims there is no God (‘the fool says in his
heart, “There is no God”’):
P1: God is a being ‘that than which nothing greater can be conceived’.
P2: The atheist understands this definition even if he does not understand that
God exists.
