1 / 12

THE ONTOLOGICAL ARGUMENT.

THE ONTOLOGICAL ARGUMENT. A BASIC INTRODUCTION. THIS MUST BE USED AS A STARTING POINT : OTHER SHEETS, TEXT BOOK AND INFORMATION WILL BE NEEDED TO HAVE THE FULL PICTURE. Comes from Ontos : Being. Is a priori : relies on definition of a word. Is therefore, deductive and analytic.

jsproul
Download Presentation

THE ONTOLOGICAL ARGUMENT.

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. THE ONTOLOGICAL ARGUMENT. A BASIC INTRODUCTION. THIS MUST BE USED AS A STARTING POINT : OTHER SHEETS, TEXT BOOK AND INFORMATION WILL BE NEEDED TO HAVE THE FULL PICTURE.

  2. Comes from Ontos : Being. Is a priori : relies on definition of a word. Is therefore, deductive and analytic. The conclusion flows logically from the premises.(Does this make the conclusion right ?) A predicate / perfection / quality / characteristic / attribute tells us something about the subject. In the argument, Anselm says that the predicate is contained in the subject. So, God’s existence can be shown to be self-evident by analysing the word “God.” STARTING POINTS.

  3. By analysing the word “God” it will be obvious, says Anselm, that God exists. A bachelor is an unmarried male : Subject=bachelor Predicate=male, unmarried. Anselm says :- “God exists” : Subject=God Predicate=Exists. 1. What do you think of the above analysis of “God exists ?” 2. List 3 other a priori/analytic statements i.e. where the truth/falsity is known by analysing the statement. CONTINUED.

  4. DEFINITION OF GOD. • As the argument relies on analysing a definition, clearly the definition of God is vital :- • “A BEING THAN WHICH NOTHING GREATER CAN BE CONCEIVED.”

  5. The Fool. • Psalm 14 NIV •     1 “The fool says in his heart,        "There is no God."        They are corrupt, their deeds are vile;        there is no one who does good.” • Anselm says that even the fool has the concept of God in their mind, in order to reject God.

  6. Greater=perfect Conceived=thought of Existence is a perfection you can have or lack Perfection=having all perfections/predicates/qualities etc. So, to be “a Being than..” God must have the perfection of existence or else he would not be “a Being..” WHY ?? Explain your answer. FROM GOD’S DEFINITION…

  7. THIS IS WHY FOLKS… • It is surely better to exist in reality than in mind alone. • So, if God only had existence in the mind, then there could be another being who had existence in reality who would then be greater/more perfect than God. • But, this cannot be true, as God is “a Being than..” • So, God exists.

  8. GAUNILO • He criticised this first form, mainly because the first form has existence as a predicate. • Anselm’s reply was that God is “a special case” and the argument applies only to necessary beings and not to contingent things like islands. • Anselm wrote a second form of the ontological argument.

  9. ANSELM’S 2ND FORM. • Here, existence is not treated as a predicate. • Looks at 2 modes of existence : contingent (could not have been) and necessary( could not not be.) • Basic form : greater/more perfect to have necessary existence as opposed to contingent existence. Why ? • Contingent existence relies on another to bring it into existence.

  10. 2nd form (Cont.) • This being is therefore limited. This being cannot then be God as God is “a Being than..” • If God were contingent/limited, then we could conceive of another being who has the predicate/property of necessary existence and this being would then be greater/more perfect than God, as it is more perfect to have the perfection of necessary existence. • So,… nearly there….!

  11. GOD EXISTS !!! • God’s existence must be necessary in order for God to match up to the definition that Anselm has given him. • So, by analysing the definition of the word God, Anselm has shown that God exists. • To deny God’s existence, once we have that definition of God is contradictory.

  12. RESEARCH PIECE. • Use at least two texts. • Write an account of Anselm’s ontological argument. You must separate out his two forms. • Using the WJEC Level descriptors, swop your answer with someone else. Mark each other’s work.

More Related