The Ontological Argument was first put forth by St. Anselm in the 11th century. At first glance this argument may seem like it goes in a circle or is self-defining. But after thinking about it in depth, it becomes harder and harder to figure out what is actually wrong with it. The argument has been around for almost 1,000 years and has appeared in various forms. It is still discussed by many modern philosophers, and for some people it just makes sense. Because of this, I think it is worth noting. Sometimes I read it and something clicks and it makes perfect sense, other times I read it and I don’t really get it. Hopefully it will make sense for you.
There are various versions of the argument, but here is the way I best understand it:
Any thing that exists in reality is greater than things that exist only in the mind. For instance, we can imagine a unicorn. Unicorns are pretty cool, but they only exist in the mind or on paper. They do not exist in reality. But if they did, we would say that the real unicorn is a greater being than the unicorn in my coloring book.
We can apply similar logic to God’s existence. If God exists in our minds, he is pretty cool. He is powerful, created the world, and has lived forever. But, a God existing only in our minds is not nearly as great as a God that exists in reality. The following is where the major difference between the unicorn and God examples arises. God is said to be the greatest being we can conceive. He is a being “than which none greater can be conceived.” A unicorn is just a cool combination of animals, but nothing can be greater than God. He is all-powerful, all-knowing, all-loving, and the list goes on.
Since God is a being whom we cannot conceive of anyone greater, we must say he exists. Why? Because if he only exists only in the mind, than he is not the greatest being we can conceive of. All we would have to do is conceive of a God that exists, and He would be greater than the God that exists only in the mind.
We cannot apply the same logic to the unicorn here, because we could easily conceive of something greater than a unicorn. But we cannot conceive of something greater than God, because He is the greatest of all things. Part of our conception of God is that He created the universe. Since He is above all things and the originator of all things, we can safely say that He is the greatest being we can conceive of. And since the greatest being we can conceive of must exist, then God (the greatest being we can conceive) must exist.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
Existence is not a predicate-Kant paraphrased.
ReplyDeleteThe ontological argument should not convince anyone. Look at Gaunilo's perfect island. Just because I can imagine a "most perfect island" doesn't mean it actually exists. A priori existence just doesn't work.
The Problem with Guanilo's perfect island is we cannot conceive of a perfect island, one which none can be greater. What would a perfect island look like? How big would it be? What would the temperature be? Since an island is a finite thing, there can always be a better one. But God is conceived as having infinite power, infinite goodness, infinite knowledge, etc. You may think you can imagine a better God, but this is not possible because of his infinite nature.
ReplyDeleteThe problem with Kant's objection is that Anselm does not claim existence as a predicate in his argument, so Kant's objection does not apply.
How exactly does Guanilo's island objection not apply?
ReplyDeleteThe ontological argument is stating that God is the greatest being we can conceive, and therefore must exist because an existing God is superior to one just in the mind. Guanilo is stating that he can think of a "perfect" island, one which no greater island can be conceived. It doesn't matter what criteria he uses to define a perfect island. If I state any old thing, like an apple, and say I can conceive of a perfect Platonic form of it; following the ontological arguments structure, that perfect apple must exist. A conclusion that should be absurd to everyone.
Saying that I can conceive of something greater than an apple doesn't give you any room to manuever. Besides, can't I conceive of something greater than God? Namely a new God that created Him?
The reason you cannot conceive of something greater than God is that He is, by definition, the single greatest possible thing. So, if you conceive of a God that created the old God, than the old God would not have been the greatest thing possible and never would have been God to begin with.
ReplyDeleteA perfect apple and a perfect island cannot be defined. That is the major difference. There could always be a sweeter apple or a sandier beach, but God has unlimited power, unlimited benevolence, etc.