Arguments of reason

• A Priori or A Posteriori?

  A Priori ontological arguments for the existence are seen as more appealing and persuasive as they are made up of reasoning. Just like maths. A Posteriori can be seen as weaker as it is based on knowledge which can be modified or changed throughout our lifetimes. This means conclusions can change. However, A Priori can still be questioned as reasoning develops through time.
• Can existence be treated as a predicate?

  Kant believes that existence is not a predicate but is actually in a different category as somethings existence isn't a predicate. Norman Malcolm argues that existence for a contingent being is not a predicate, but for a necessary being it is. Helps us distinguish between one thing and another. For most things, it is not a predicate but in fact is a predicate for God.
• Does the ontological argument justify belief in God?

  Anselm didn't set out to convert unbelievers, but claimed to be exploring his own faith. Karl Barth, also believes that is based of a religious experience. Deeper understanding of God and his greatness. Religious belief goes beyond the bounds of reason. Intellectual understanding. Faith in God seems to demand an element of uncertainty. Believers think that God keeps an epistemic distance.
• The ontological argument may involve a category error, as existence is not necessarily a predicate that can be ascribed to God.
• Malcolm's argument suggests that for God to be God, God must have necessary existence.
• Malcolm's argument concludes that God's existence must be either impossible or necessary, and argues that it is not logically contradictory.
• The Ontological Argument:

  • A Priori argument
  • Multiple A Priori arguments put forward over thousands of years
  • Ontology is a branch of Philosophy that explores the concept of existence
  • What it means for something to exist
  • Deductive argument
• Anselm's ontological argument #1:

  • Archbishop of Canterbury
  • Faith seeking understanding
  • His first argument

  P1. God is the greatest conceivable being (by definition)

  P2. It is greater to exist in reality than the mind alone

  P3. God exists in the mind

  C1. Therefore, God exists in reality

  • Anselm argued that God is a necessary being
  • Analogy of a painter who has an idea of what they will paint in their mind before creating the painting in reality. This is meant to show that there is a difference between an object being in the mind and being in reality.
• Analytic propositions are propositions that are true by definition which means it doesn't have to be tested
• Synthetic Propositions are propositions that add to our understanding, but have to be experienced
• Guanilo's Criticisms of Anselm's #1 argument:

  • He is a French monk
  • Replaced God with a perfect Island in Anselm's argument
  • Rebutted Anselm in "On Behalf of the Fool"
  • Just because you've thought of something, doesn't mean it has to exist in this reality, as the perfect island doesn't exist so why should God
• Anselm's Ontological argument #2:

  • Anselm said that Gaunilo comparing God ( a necessary being) to a contingent being is not correct
  • So, the argument only works for a necessary being
  • The though of a non-necessary God is a weaker God than a God that has to exist
• Aquinas' Criticisms of Anselm:

  • Although he believed in God, he argued against the Ontological Argument
  • A Priori arguments alone couldn't prove the existence of God, there must be A Posteriori arguments too

  1. God can't be self evident, as people can think of God not existing
  2. He didn't agree with Anselm's definition of as God is unknowable to humans as he is transcendent
• Descartes' version of the ontological argument:

  • Descartes reformulated the ontological argument
  • French Philosopher
  • He said "God is the supremely perfect being"
  • He argued that God was perfect
  • We are born with innate concepts -> one being God
  • With the Analogy of the Triangle and the mountain, it shows there there is an essence that makes God up
  • One of those "essences" being existence
  • Existence is perfection, and God is the most perfect thing and therefore, must exist
• Immanuel Kant's Criticism:

  • Prussian philosopher
  • Existence is NOT a predicate

  1. Kant argued that if you believe in God, it is logical to believe his existence is necessary. Just because you can define something in an analytical way doesn't mean that it makes it real
  2. Existence is not a predicate. Thinking of something doesn't make it exist. Description is not improved by saying something is real. Saying God exists tells us more about God that giving a definition of God. Existence is not perfection it is an affirmation
• David Hume on the Ontological argument:

  • all existential statements are synthetic
  • It can only be a true A Priori argument if it is contradictory to not believe in God, yet it is not
• Norman Malcolm:

  • Built onto Anselm's #2 argument
  • God Necessarily exists
  • The Truth of it is either

  1. Impossible
  2. Possible
  3. Necessary
• 1. IMPOSSIBLE EXISTENCE

  • The existence of anything is only impossible if by definition it is a logical contradiction

  2. IS GOD'S EXISTENCE POSSIBLE?

  • By possible, we mean contingent. God could exist or not exist. It is not essential. Malcolm says that a contingent God is not God, therefore he must be necessary.

  3. NECESSARY

  • Malcolm argued that God can't simply exist as a matter of contingency, therefore, he must be necessary. God can't exist below anything
• Modern day ontological arguments:

  Charles Hartshorne and Alvin Plantinga say that ordinary existence is not a predicate, but necessary existence is perfection.
• Bertrand Russell as 20th Century opposition:

  • "Present King of France is bald"
  • This is not true
  • Therefore -> "Present King of France is not bald"
  • No, no such thing as a present King of France
  • Predicates are irrelevant if the existence is uncertain
• Deductive Arguments are based upon a priori knowledge. If the premises are true and the structure is valid, then the conclusion must be true
• Logical Fallacy:

  • an argument that may sound convincing or true but is actually flawed
  • a possible logical fallacy in this argument is the assumption that existence is a predicate
• Karl Barth believed that the Ontological argument is about faith not about logic. Anselm is not trying to convert or prove God, he is trying to understand God. Expression of his faith
• Karl Barth: Theology of revelation, God is the source of all truth, God is the author of the Bible, God is the source of all wisdom, God is the source of all knowledge,
• intrinsic maximum or upper limit to the possible intensity of every. positive property which is capable of degrees
• Plantinga argued that islands have no Intrinsic Maximum