The Ontological Argument

The Ontological The Ontological ArgumentArgument

Anselm’s ArgumentAnselm’s Argument

So the fool has to agree that the concept of something So the fool has to agree that the concept of something than which nothing greater can be thought exists in his than which nothing greater can be thought exists in his understanding, since he understood what he heard and understanding, since he understood what he heard and whatever is understood is in the understanding. And whatever is understood is in the understanding. And certainly that than which nothing greater can be thought certainly that than which nothing greater can be thought cannot exist only in the understanding. For if it exists cannot exist only in the understanding. For if it exists only in the understanding, it is possible to think of it only in the understanding, it is possible to think of it existing also in reality, and that is greater. If that than existing also in reality, and that is greater. If that than which nothing greater can be thought exists in the which nothing greater can be thought exists in the understanding alone, then this thing than which nothing understanding alone, then this thing than which nothing greater can be thought is something than which a greater greater can be thought is something than which a greater can be thought. And this is clearly impossible. Therefore can be thought. And this is clearly impossible. Therefore there can be no doubt at all that something than which a there can be no doubt at all that something than which a greater cannot be thought exists both in the greater cannot be thought exists both in the understanding and in reality.understanding and in reality.


1.1. The greatest being conceivable does not The greatest being conceivable does not exist in realityexist in reality

2.2. Something that really exists is greater Something that really exists is greater than something that doesn’tthan something that doesn’t

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

3.3. the greatest being conceivable is not the the greatest being conceivable is not the greatest being conceivablegreatest being conceivable



2.2. Something that really exists is greater than Something that really exists is greater than something that doesn’tsomething that doesn’t

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

3.3. the greatest being conceivable is not the the greatest being conceivable is not the greatest being conceivablegreatest being conceivable

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

4.4. The greatest being conceivable The greatest being conceivable does does exist in exist in realityreality

Gaunilo’s IslandGaunilo’s Island

1.1. The greatest The greatest islandisland conceivable does conceivable does not exist in realitynot exist in reality


------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

3.3. the greatest island conceivable is not the the greatest island conceivable is not the greatest being conceivablegreatest being conceivable


1.1. The greatest island conceivable does not The greatest island conceivable does not exist in realityexist in reality


------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

3.3. the greatest island conceivable is not the the greatest island conceivable is not the greatest island conceivablegreatest island conceivable

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

4.4. The greatest island conceivable The greatest island conceivable does does exist exist in realityin reality


Anselm’s ReplyAnselm’s Reply

First FormFirst Form

1.1. The greatest conceivable X does not exist in The greatest conceivable X does not exist in realityreality


------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

3.3. the greatest conceivable X is not the the greatest conceivable X is not the greatest conceivable Xgreatest conceivable X

A ContradictionA Contradiction

Anselm’s ReplyAnselm’s Reply

Second FormSecond Form

1.1. The X does not exist in realityThe X does not exist in reality


------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

3.3. the X is not the greatest conceivable beingthe X is not the greatest conceivable being

Not A ContradictionNot A Contradiction

The Fool’s ReplyThe Fool’s Reply










1.1.The X does not exist in realityThe X does not exist in reality

2.2.Something that really exists is more Y Something that really exists is more Y than something that doesn’tthan something that doesn’t

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

3.3.the X is not the most Y conceivable beingthe X is not the most Y conceivable being


1.1.The X does not exist in realityThe X does not exist in reality

2.2.Something that really exists is more Something that really exists is more dirtydirty than something that doesn’tthan something that doesn’t

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

3.3.the X is not the most the X is not the most dirtydirty conceivable conceivable beingbeing

Descartes’s VersionDescartes’s Version

… … whenever I choose upon any thought of the whenever I choose upon any thought of the First and Supreme Being, and as it were bring First and Supreme Being, and as it were bring out the idea of him from the treasury of my mind, out the idea of him from the treasury of my mind, I must necessarily ascribe to him all perfections I must necessarily ascribe to him all perfections … This necessity clearly ensures that, when later … This necessity clearly ensures that, when later on I observe that existence is a perfection , I am on I observe that existence is a perfection , I am justified in concluding that the First and justified in concluding that the First and Supreme Being exists. Supreme Being exists.


1.1. God has all the perfectionsGod has all the perfections

2.2. Existence is a perfectionExistence is a perfection

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

3.3. God existsGod exists


Kant’s CritiqueKant’s Critique

Being is evidently not a real predicate, that is, a Being is evidently not a real predicate, that is, a conception of something which is added to the conception of something which is added to the conception of some other thing. It is merely the positing conception of some other thing. It is merely the positing of a thing, or of certain determinations in it. Logically, it of a thing, or of certain determinations in it. Logically, it is merely the copula of a judgement. The proposition, is merely the copula of a judgement. The proposition, God is omnipotent, contains two conceptions, which God is omnipotent, contains two conceptions, which have a certain object or content; the word is, is no have a certain object or content; the word is, is no additional predicate – it merely indicates the relation of additional predicate – it merely indicates the relation of the predicate to the subject. Now, if I take the subject the predicate to the subject. Now, if I take the subject (God) with alll its predicates (omnipotence being one), (God) with alll its predicates (omnipotence being one), and say: God is, or There is a God, I add no new and say: God is, or There is a God, I add no new predicate to the conception of God, I merely posit or predicate to the conception of God, I merely posit or affirm the existence of the subject with all its predicates affirm the existence of the subject with all its predicates – I posit the object in relation to my conception. – I posit the object in relation to my conception.


Kant’s CritiqueKant’s Critique

1.1. The attribution of real predicates defines The attribution of real predicates defines the conception of an objectthe conception of an object

2.2. The attribution of existence does not The attribution of existence does not define the conception of an objectdefine the conception of an object

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

3.3. ‘exists’ is not a real predicate‘exists’ is not a real predicate


Against KantAgainst Kant

1.1. The attribution of property predicates The attribution of property predicates defines the conception of an objectdefines the conception of an object

2.2. The attribution of existence does not The attribution of existence does not define the conception of an objectdefine the conception of an object

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

3.3. ‘exists’ is not a property predicate‘exists’ is not a property predicate



4.4. ‘X’ is a property predicate if X is a ‘X’ is a property predicate if X is a property property

5.5. ‘exists’ is not a property predicate ‘exists’ is not a property predicate

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

6.6. Existence is not a propertyExistence is not a property



What makes existence a ‘perfection’ What makes existence a ‘perfection’ anyway?anyway?

Documents

The Ontological Argument