The Ontological argument 2 This time its critical

The Ontological argument 2 This time it’s critical!

Meet the commentators ¡ Gaunilo of Marmoutier ¡ Immanuel Kant ¡ Gottlob Frege ¡ Bertrand Russell ¡ Brian Davies

Gaunilo V Anselm Round 1

The Perfect Island ‘Inestimable wealth’ ‘Abundant delicacies’ ‘uninhabited’ ‘all manner of riches’

The Perfect Island “Anselm is trying to move from a definition of God to ¡ The KEY issue: the suggestion of God’s This is not I do notexistence. deny that such an aisland valid move. ” Gaunilo could exist… …I simply will not agree that it does, until I have been shown PROOF! Gaunilo’s says: just because he can CONCEIVE of such a place, that does not actually mean such a place exists!

So this disproves the argument? Well no, not really! ¡ Anselm never compares things of a like kind. Gaunilo’s objections not ‘that than which nothingdo greater successfully refute Anselm can be conceived’ ¡ Whereas, Gaunilo is comparing islands ¡ Islands have no intrinsic maximum ¡

Kant V Descartes Round 2

Triangular logic? Kant If objected to Descartes’ claimnot So: you say God does Kant successfully refutes that denying God’s existence was then cease to theexist same and as trying toof deny triangles Descartes’ idea existence have three sides, which is imagine the concept of God, as a predicate. contradictory. there is that no contradiction. ¡ Kant states if you dismiss both In order to deal with the three sides (predicate) and that Therefore it can be logical to of the triangle he itselfserves (subject)up then Anselm say does not exist. ’ you are‘God left with no contradiction. another argument… ¡

Kant V Anselm Round 3

‘existence is not a predicate’ Kant states that’s saying X exists tells us nothing about X ¡ Whereas, ‘X is female, or tall’ does ¡ A predicate must give info about X ¡ Saying ‘X is’ does not ¡ Existence does not add anything to the concept (idea of) X ¡

Kant If X exists tells us about a property that X has, then X does not exist denies that it has this property (or affirms that it lacks it). ¡ Paradox! ¡ Because ‘X exists’ does not tell us anything, Kant is saying it is meaningless and is the same as saying X does not exist

Frege V Anselm &Descartes Round 4

Frege (1848 -1925) 1 st order predicates Tell us about the nature of something 2 nd order predicates Tell us about concepts Frege argues that Anselm & Descartes only use 1 st order predicates, when existence is a 2 nd order predicate.

Bertrand Russell Claims Anselm uses the word ‘exist’ incorrectly. ¡ Existence cannot be a predicate. ¡ If it were, we could argue: Men exist. Santa Claus is a man. Therefore, Santa Claus exists. This is a syllogism. ¡

Brian Davies. V the Ontological argument Round 4

Brian Davies that is ¡Davies ‘A pixieargues is a little man can be used ears. to with pointed define the concept of God, as ina 1), Therefore there actually exists pixie. ’ but not as in 2) which pre-supposes no logical reason. ¡existence ‘is’ is usedfor in two different ways ¡ 1) To define something: ‘a queen is a female monarch’ ¡ 2) To explain there actually is something: ‘there is such a thing as a vampire’.

The argument against Plantinga’s ‘Possible worlds’ idea. Round 5

Plantinga’s possible worlds Is Plantinga’s claim coherent? ¡ Even if we accept a being with ‘maximal greatness’ is possible, and therefore it is possible that such a being exists in our world… ¡ …it does not follow that such a being actually exists! ¡ It is possible, but not actual. ¡

TASK: In your groups you must prepare to present your case. ‘This house believes the Ontological argument cannot prove the existence of God. ’ 2 groups will speak for the motion, 2 groups against. Everybody in your group must contribute. Elect a scribe and 2 spokespeople.

Debate ‘This house believes the Ontological argument cannot prove the existence of God. ’ Order of speaking: 1) For the argument 2) Against the argument 3) Reply for the argument 4) Reply against the argument

Russell’s idea To label & define something is to provide an intention An animal with four legs & udders Intention to describe a cow. ¡ To say the cow exists is to provide an extension to my intention. ¡ We see cows in field, so we accept they exist. ¡

Russell cont. ¡ ¡ ‘that than which nothing greater can be conceived’ is simply the totality of everything the human mind can conceive. That is the intention of the phrase. Extension? If any idea can be said to exist, then ‘that than which nothing greater can be conceived’ must exist as it is the totality of all ideas.