• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Examine the major features of the Ontological argument for the existence of God.

Extracts from this document...


Examine the major features of the Ontological argument for the existence of God. The ontological argument has a few key features, for example it is an a-priori argument, which means that it is based on logic alone and does not rely on us having experience of the concepts to relate to it. One feature of the ontological argument is that it is a deductive argument, this means that the conclusion automatically follows the premises. If the premises are true then you cannot deny the conclusion. The premises of the argument are that God is the greatest conceivable being and that existence is a property that one can have. If we accept these premises then it makes it really difficult to deny the conclusion of the argument due to its deductive form. A feature of the Ontological argument is that it is an a-priori argument, that is, it does not rely on our experience, only logic. It only relies on our knowledge of Anslem's definition of God as being the Greatest Conceivable Being. Another key feature of the argument is that it is in analytic form. This means an analytical statement that is true by its own definition, for example, "All bachelors are unmarried men." In the same way the ontological argument says that the idea of God itself contains the idea of his existence. If this is true then God's existence should be self evident to everyone. ...read more.


A French monk named Gaunilo was the first to refute the ontological argument. Gaunilo said that Anselm's reasoning was absurd when it was applied to other fields. Gaunilo gave the example of "a most perfect island." he argued that this island that would be most perfect would have to exist in reality if we were to follow the reasoning of Anselm and says that it would be impossible to prove the existence of such an island. However, Anselm relied to Gaunilo with a justified and seemingly tight argument. Anselm argued that his reasoning could only apply to God, as only God was infinite and unique. Anselm said that it was impossible to have a perfect finite thing in existence because we could always postulate something better than it. Anselm concluded that only God was perfect and everything else fell short of perfection so the ontological argument only applies to God. This attempt to weaken the argument appears to fail and shows the argument to be strong. In the 17th century Renes Descartes reformulated Anselm's first form of the ontological argument in his book "Meditations" Descartes postulated a "supremely perfect being" Descartes main contribution to the ontological argument was that of treating existence as a predicate that is a good thing to have. He concluded if existence is a predicate then it was surely better to have than to lack it and that if this was true then God must posses existence as a predicate and therefore exist. ...read more.


This prevents this version being a proof. Malcolm does not believe that the ontological argument is persuasive in itself. He believes that some other insights are required from within human experience, such as a sense of the passing nature of all contingent things, before a person can understand the insights of religious faith. In a different vein D.Z. Philips supports the ontological argument for its logical clarification of the concept of God. He accepts that Anselm was attempting to express what he already believed. His argument is that, God is unlike all contingent things, and is not part of any class or kind. The key to the argument according to Philips, is in the way Anselm expresses the unique sense of the word God. The word has a unique 'grammar', and it is therefore a mistake to even say 'God exists' in any ordinary sense. God does not 'exist' alongside other existing beings, Philips refers to this as non-realism. Philips argues that a call for a profound level of understanding that only faith can provide proves Gods existence. In conclusion, the ontological arguments in both of its forms fail as proofs of Gods existence. In both forms there are many criticisms that damage the argument and restrict its success, for example Anselm's first form is dependent on us accepting Anslem's definition of the greatest conceivable being. In the second form the argument fails to reach a conclusion and only leaves us with the possibility of the greatest conceivable being existing therefore it fails as a proof that God is this being. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Philosophy section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Philosophy essays

  1. Explain the ontological argument from Anselm and Descartes.

    Existence, according to Descartes, is as much a characteristic of God as 180 degrees is a characteristic of a triangle. Just as it is logically impossible to say, 'that a triangle does not have 180 degrees', it is also logically impossible to say, 'God does not exist'.

  2. What are they key features of the design argument for the existence of God?

    This leads to the argument's next strength, visibility of evidence. The argument is based on the way in which the world appears to be designed and so therefore the evidence for this is all around us. This wealth of what some maintain to be evidence of design would therefore give

  1. Analyze the distinctive features of the Ontological Argument

    It seemed logical to conclude that to argue that there is no God, even the fool must understand the concept of God. Since the greatest thought must have an equivalent reality to be greater than even the least significant thing in reality for God to be the greatest thought, God must exist.

  2. Describe the main strengths and weaknesses of the cosmological argument for the existence of ...

    for the existence of the universe. This absolute cause must be something from which existence springs. God is a metaphysically necessary, independent being who could not 'not-exist'; from this necessary being came the contingent universe.61 As Kenny says "Aquinas believed that the sun was very much more than a necessary condition of human generation.

  1. The Ontological Argument - Critique

    Kant did not criticise Anselm, although he may have had access to his work, he instead attacked Descartes formulation of the argument. Descartes, in the midst of doubting all he knew, famously reaching the conclusion "Cogito ergo sum", thought that if he could know of God, he could work forward

  2. Descartes Meditations

    The things which we perceive as real are actually just shadows on a wall, which represents us being deceived in what we think is real and true. And just as the escaped prisoner ascends into the light of the sun, we amass knowledge and ascend into the light of true

  1. Outline the main features of virtue ethic

    ultimate of all ends was the chief good, the greatest good, After the theories from Aristotle Finally, the ideas of Macintyre acted as a motivation for the increased interest in virtue ethics, Macintyre reinvented virtue ethics and gave a more modern outlook towards virtue ethics, and is a key feature within this.

  2. Outline the Ontological Argument for the existence of God.

    Anselm argues that it is better to be a necessary being than a contingent being, a being that depends on other things for its existence i.e. having a cause/end because this would ultimately limit your power. He explains that God must be a necessary being because if God exists as

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work