Transcript The Ontological argument 2

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 objected to Descartes’ claim
So:
If
you
say
God
does
not
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)
1st order predicates
Tell us about the nature of something
2nd order predicates Tell us about
concepts
Frege argues that Anselm & Descartes
only use 1st order predicates, when
existence is a 2nd 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 DaviesV
the Ontological argument
Round 4
Brian Davies
that
is
Davies
‘A pixieargues
is a little
man
can
used to
with be
pointed
define
concept
of God,
as in
1),
ears. the
Therefore
there
actually
exists
a 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.