Explain the Ontological Argument + Kant's Argument has Finished all Arguments
Extracts from this document...
Introduction
Transfer-Encoding: chunked Explain the Ontological Argument The Ontological argument uses deductive reasoning to prove the existence of God. The Ontological argument is before experience ? a priori. This is opposed to a posteriori which is after an experience. This means that the Ontological argument is objective. All Ontological arguments have a series of premises and a conclusion that, if the premises are true, must also be true as well. An example of a deductive, a priori reasoning is 2+2=4. This does not need evidence to know it is true. The scholars mentioned will be using this method prove God?s existence. Saint Anselm is one of the first philosophers to use deductive reasoning. He had two main ideas. The first was found in the Proslogion 2. Anselm used the famous saying God is, ?that which nothing greater can be conceived (TWNGCBC).? This is another way of saying that God is the greatest being to exist. Anselm?s premises are: God exists in the mind ? we can think of a God so God exists mentally. It is greater to exist in mind and reality together than in mind alone. ...read more.
Middle
Plantinga also used necessary existence, but unlike Anselm and Descartes, both he and Malcolm didn?t use it as a predicate. In a possible world God exists, but God has necessary existence so God must exist in all possible worlds. If God exists in all possible worlds then God must exist in this world therefore God exists. Kant?s Argument Has Finished All Ontological Arguments Kant?s objection to the Ontological argument can be seen by some to have finished the Ontological argument and it can be seen as irrelevant to others. Immanuel Kant is a theist philosopher who is well known for criticising many different arguments for the existence of God. Kant disliked both Anselm?s and Descartes? Ontological argument. To Kant existence is not a predicate ? which was the key argument in Proslogion 2 and Descartes? argument. Kant used the example of thalers (currency in Europe during the 1800s when Kant was alive) to prove his point. Kant said that if you add existence to a list of other predicates no one would think any differently about thalers. Since nothing in our minds change when we use existence as a predicate, existence cannot be a predicate. ...read more.
Conclusion
In the argument there is a possible world where God exists necessarily. This means God must exist in all possible worlds necessarily and as a result God exists in our world. I think this shows that Kant has not finished all Ontological arguments because Kant?s argument was based on existence not being a predicate. However, Alvin Plantinga?s argument was not based off existence being a predicate at all. This means that Kant?s argument is irrelevant when using Plantinga?s argument for Gods existence. In addition, Malcolm also created his version of the Ontological argument. His argument does not use existence as a predicate either. Instead Malcolm uses deduction to have God end up as an unlimited, necessary being or as impossible to exist. Since there is always a possibility of such a being to exist, God must exist. Since Malcolm?s argument has no relevance to Kant?s criticism based on existence not being a predicate, Malcolm?s argument has not been finished. Overall, I believe that Kant?s argument has not finished the Ontological argument because clearly Kant has misunderstood Anselm?s argument. Also, his argument has no relevance to Plantinga or Malcolm. His argument may have finished Descartes argument but the others are still strong. So, Kant?s argument that existence is not a predicate is not strong enough to finish all the Ontological arguments. ...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
