Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
22 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
What was the ontological arguement? |
An a priori argument using deductive reasoning to argue for the existence of God (ontology is the study of existence) |
|
|
Anselm's First Argument (1) |
1) We conceive of a God as a being which no greater can be conceived of - even atheists agree |
|
|
Anselm's First Argument (2)
|
2) This being either exists in the mind alone or both in the mind and in reality |
|
|
Anselm's First Argument (3)
|
3) It is better for something to exist in reality and in the mind rather than just in the mind - EG would you rather have a McDonalds in the mind or in the mind and in reality. |
|
|
Anselm's First Argument (4)
|
Therefore this being which no greater can be conceived of exists in reality as well as in the mind. |
|
|
Quote |
"the fool has said in his heart, there is no God" |
|
|
What did Gaunillo argue? |
on behalf of the "fool" |
|
|
Gaunillo island example (1) |
Imagine a perfect island, the best you can imagine, perfect in all of its aspects. |
|
|
Gaunillo island example (2)
|
Simply because you can conceive of something does not mean to say it exists. |
|
|
Gaunillo island example (3) |
Perhaps the person making and believing these arguments is the fool. (slaaaaay) "You cannot define things into existance" |
|
|
Gaunillo on gossip |
Imagine being told about a man in great detail. Just because you can conceive of him doesn't mean he exists. It could easily be gossip and he could not exist. |
|
|
Anselm's reply to Gaunillo (Stage 2 of his argument) |
The island analogy is invalid because it is contingent and could therefore not exist whereas God is necessary and therefore needs to exist. |
|
|
Plantinga also said: |
An island could be improved it could have one more palm tree or be a little bit warmer but God is the greatest thing that can be conceived of and therefore cannot be made greater so this argument is not valid. |
|
|
Descartes ontological argument (1) |
God is a supremely good being. |
|
|
Descartes ontological argument (2) |
Existence is a perfection, if something did not exist, by definition it is not perfect. |
|
|
Descartes ontological argument (3) QUOTE
|
"Existence can no more be separated from the essence of God than the fact that its three angles equal two right angles can be separated from the essence of a triangle.” |
|
|
Kant's objection |
"Existence is not a predicate" Saying that something exists adds nothing to the description. If we are discussing it we can assume it exists. Existence cannot be a quality of God because it is not a quality. |
|
|
Evaluation: strength 1 |
Kant's criticism may not hold - existence does add to a description as it distinguishes between fiction and reality - so saying God exists could alter the definition by telling us God is not a fictional character created to tell us a story which alters the definition and acts ad a predicate. |
|
|
Evaluation: strength 2
|
Fits with existing religious beliefs - no religious believer would argue that God is not the greatest possible being or that he doesn't exist. |
|
|
Evaluation: strength 3
|
Difficult to criticize because it makes logical sense. |
|
|
Evaluation: weakness 1
|
Proslogion was written by a monk as a prayer - can it be used as an argument for the existence of God or is it more of a support for those who already believe? |
|
|
Evaluation: weakness 2
|
Can we rely on logical evidence alone? Needs backing from empirical evidence. (Counter: the bible/religious artifacts could be counted as empirical evidence. |
