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

Explain the Ontological Argument + Kant's Argument has Finished all Arguments

Extracts from this document...


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.


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.


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

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. The Ontological Argument - Critique

    That is to say, for every perfect horse, or perfect apple, who is to decided which is greater, the perfect horse of the perfect apple? Thus, Anselm's argument remains; it can only apply to that than which no greater can be conceived, not to objects who may or may not be perfect within their own realms.

  2. Explain the ontological argument from Anselm and Descartes.

    Anselm then decided to prove the type of existence of God and this is the second form of the argument. Anselm begins again by defining God, the same definition as before, and then goes a step further by also describing God as something 'that cannot be thought not to exist'.

  1. Analyze the distinctive features of the Ontological Argument

    it must have three sides however , if you do not have the triangle , you have neither its three sides nor its three degrees. Hence if there is no perfection there is no existing God. Additionally he argued that if one accepts that there is a God its reasonable to accept his existence.

  2. Evaluate Descartes Method of Doubt

    An important area of evaluation is Descartes three methods of doubt itself. As I stated earlier they have not been immune from scepticism. George Dicker in 'An Analytical and historical Introduction' raised one objection. Consider this argument as an example: some paintings are forgeries.

  1. Compare and contrast the contributions of Descartes and Humes on the issue of the ...

    For example if eveybody in the world except for one saw all the stars fall out of the sky, it would be a hreater miracle for evryone to be lying to the one person who didn't see then for the miracle to be false.

  2. The Ontological Argument Will Never Be Any Use In Trying To Prove Gods Existence ...

    excellent not to be in the understanding alone, but to exist both in the understanding and reality, for this reason [the island] must exist". This example is used through Reductio ad Absurdum, or showing the absurdity of a statement or argument.

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

    difficulty of atheists understand how it could be true because they do not have the assumption about a God. The argument proposes the existence is entailed in the concept of God but many people argue that conceiving God is not possible and therefore his existence to cannot be possible.


    both in the intellect and outside it, it does not follow that there is no possibility of God not existing. And so he concludes that God has to exist and cannot fail to exist.

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