THE ONTOLOGICAL ARGUMENT.

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
STARTING POINTS.

• 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, Gods existence can be shown to be
  self-evident by analysing the word God.
  

3
CONTINUED.

• By analysing the word God it will be obvious,
  says Anselm, that God exists.
• A bachelor is an unmarried male
• Subjectbachelor
• Predicatemale, unmarried.

• Anselm says -
• God exists
• SubjectGod
• PredicateExists.
• 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.

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
FROM GODS DEFINITION

• Greaterperfect
• Conceivedthought of
• Existence is a perfection you can have or lack
• Perfectionhaving all perfections/predicates/quali
  ties 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.

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.
• Anselms 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
ANSELMS 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 !!!

• Gods 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 Gods existence, once we have that
  definition of God is contradictory.

12
RESEARCH PIECE.

• Use at least two texts.
• Write an account of Anselms ontological
  argument. You must separate out his two forms.
• Using the WJEC Level descriptors, swop your
  answer with someone else. Mark each others work.