That Assess the ontological argument must have a limit point, a point of greatest intensity and of greatest existence. Broad puts this important point: Therefore, the existence of God is logically necessary. If the concept is coherent, then even a minimal understanding of the concept is sufficient to make the argument.
For example, if one thinks that abundant fruit is a great-making property for an island, then, no matter how great a particular island might be, it will always be possible to imagine a greater island because there is no intrinsic maximum for Assess the ontological argument. Indeed, there are plenty of beings that will probably never exist in this world that exist in other logically possible worlds, like unicorns.
Therefore, if the universe is the product of an existent creator, we could conceive of a greater being—one which does not exist. If the proposition is analytic, as the ontological argument takes it to be, then the statement would be true only because of the meaning given to the words.
Gale argued that premise three, the "possibility premise", begs the question. Immanuel Kant put forward an influential criticism of the ontological argument in his Critique of Pure Reason.
God exists as an idea in the mind. Roughly put, the problem of divine foreknowledge is as follows. A being that necessarily exists in reality is greater than a being that does not necessarily exist.
Existence is not a property in, say, the way that being red is a property of an apple. In this way Anselm implies that anyone who has minimal intelligence should be able to see that God exists by definition.
He claims that the notion that you may deny the antecedent of such a proposition can be made explicit as follows: The Argument Described St.
I shall then assess this stronger Ontological Argument in depth, ultimately concluding that at best the argument shows that if God exists then His existence is necessary, but that there is a strong case for believing that the Ontological Argument can tell us nothing about the nature of God.
Since the notion of maximal greatness, in contrast to the notion of an unlimited being as Malcolm defines it, is conceived in terms that straightforwardly entail existence in every logically possible world and hence eternal existence in every logically possible worldthere are no worries about whether maximal greatness, in contrast to unlimitedness, entails something stronger than eternal existence.
It follows that if we have a perception that p, then even though it might not be the case that p, it is at least the case that possibly p. If mystics in fact perceive the existence of a maximally great being, it follows that the existence of a maximally great being is at least possible.
Notice, for example, that the claim that x necessarily exists entails a number of claims that attribute particular properties to x.
As we have seen, Plantinga expressly defines maximal excellence in such terms. These problems notwithstanding, several prominent philosophers today continue to work on this more unusual form of theological argument.
A piland that exists as an idea in the mind and in reality is greater than a piland that exists only as an idea in the mind. This, he argued, proved the existence of an unsurpassably great necessary being.
Thus, either existence is independent of others or it is in need of others. I have shown clearly that Anselm has failed to show a priori the existence of God since an inductive leap is required to move from the being that is the subject of his argument to the claim that that being is God.
There have been several attempts to render the persuasive force of the ontological argument more transparent by recasting it using the logical structures of contemporary modal logic. Nothing is demonstrable, unless the contrary implies a contradiction.
What is the Ontological argument for the existence of God?
For, it is possible to conceive of a being which cannot be conceived not to exist; and this is greater than one which can be conceived not to exist. Therefore the perfect island must exist in the mind and in reality.
Lack of moisture can prevent trees from existing in a certain region of the earth. He suggested that people cannot know the nature of God and, therefore, cannot conceive of God in the way Anselm proposed.
Of course, no knowledge of God may be had empirically due to his metaphysical nature, so my ultimate conclusion here is that it cannot be known whether or not God exists by reflection on the Ontological Argument. Accordingly, the very concept of a being that instantiates all the perfections implies that it exists.
For example, if x necessarily exists, then its existence does not depend on the existence of any being unlike contingent human beings whose existence depends, at the very least, on the existence of their parents.
But we cannot imagine something that is greater than God for it is a contradiction to suppose that we can imagine a being greater than the greatest possible being that can be imagined.
Being is evidently not a real predicate, that is, a conception of something which is added to the conception of some other thing. Therefore God must exist in the mind and in reality. Thus, the argument concludes that omniscience and omnipotence are logically incompatible.Weaknesses of the Ontological Argument.
The main weakness of Anselm's argument is posed by Gaunilo of Marmoutier, a contemporary of Anselm, Gaunilo posed, using reductio ad absurdum, that if the logic of the argument were applied to anything other than God, its conclusion would be unreasonable.
Mar 23, · Evaluate Anselm’s Ontological Argument for the Existence of God. The Ontological Argument for the existence of God is the only a priori argument for God’s existence; it attempts to show that if you reflect properly on the nature of God you will find that He must exist.
Anselm: Ontological Argument for God's Existence One of the most fascinating arguments for the existence of an all-perfect God is the ontological argument. While there are several different versions of the argument, all purport to show that it is self-contradictory to.
An ontological argument is a philosophical argument for the existence of God that uses ontology. Many arguments fall under the category of the ontological, and they tend to involve arguments about the state of being or existing.
More specifically. Answer: The ontological argument is an argument based not on observation of the world (like the cosmological and teleological arguments) but rather on reason alone.
Specifically, the ontological argument reasons from the study of being (ontology). The ontological argument was first formulated by St.
Anselm in the 11th century. It argues the existence of God from a deductive and a priori stance. God is a being than which none greater can be conceived.Download