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

Ontological Argument for the existence of God

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Ontological Argument for the existence of God Ontological justifications are a priori arguments based on pure logic and reason alone, excluding any sense of experience. Most of these arguments are based of deductive or 'modal' logic where the postulates or premises are based on the definition of the word then inferences to conclusion which is often irrefutable. The Ontological argument for the existence of God is a set of ontological proofs that attempt to use reason alone and 'analytic' statements to justify the existence of God. However, before going in-depth, we must differentiate between synthetic and analytic a priori statements. A synthetic statement is one where the predicate is not contained in the definition of a word (subject), thus, often known to be an inductive statement e.g. "Homosexuals are happy" However, we can see that this is not often the case and whether it's true or not we must ask every single homosexual there are before we can come to certainty. Analytic statements on the other hand contains a predicate which is already within a subject, thus we are simply extending the definition e.g. "Homosexuals are attracted to their own sex." Ontological arguments state that the existence of God is analytically true, which can be proven by simply the use of its own definition, by understanding the definition of God we can be certain of its existence. ...read more.

Middle

By way of example he invites us to think of an island which is perfect; if it is to be perfect then it must also intrinsically hold the value of existence and must therefore exists. Because, this was written during Anselm's period, it was possible for Anselm top reply to the refutations, he replied to the first objection by saying that the proof does not require a complete understanding of God, but only that we understand this much: that whatever else he may be, God is such that no greater being that can be conceived. In reply to Guanilo's second objection, Anselm says that God, unlike a perfect island is not thought of simply as the greatest thing of a certain type, or even the greatest thing of all, but as the being which nothing greater can be conceived. This latter concept can refer to only one thing; and that thing quite obviously is not the perfect island. However, there is an obvious flaw with the classical Ontological proof for the existence of God. For the fact that I am thinking of a being, thinking of it as existing necessarily, does not provide the slightest evidence that there actually is such a being, for the thought of a necessarily existing being is one thing and a necessarily being is another. ...read more.

Conclusion

Existence, however, is a quantifier, not a predicate, and you cannot simply define a non-existence entity to exist. We must know that logic and pure reason is not all there is to provide enough evidence for existence, in order to 'prove' we must also need empirical evidence. Logic alone is not always 'real' for a logical statement can contain two false premises and still come up with a true conclusion e.g. 1. A triangle is a 4 sided closed shape 2. This object is a 4 sided closed shape 3. Therefore it is a triangle Logic concludes that triangles are 4 sided closed shapes, and according to logic alone, it must therefore be true. However, we know with certainty that this is not the case; a triangle is a 3-sided closed shape whereas a 4-sided closed shape is known as a square. In fact, the most fundamental postulates of logic such as A=A does not necessarily hold much value in reality. If A=A is to be held true in reality then the world must be static, but, things are always changing and animals always evolving. Electrons hold dual properties as waves and particles and A=A cannot possibly hold true. To a lesser extent, A is often recognized as its pure form and concepts are often added to it. Thus we can conclude that (concept of) A = A is not necessarily true. Hence, the Ontological argument, with its irrefutable logical argument does not verify with reality. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our GCSE Existence of God 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 GCSE Existence of God essays

  1. The Ontological Argument - Describe and explain the ontological argument for the existence ...

    God both has and continues to communicate with humans. Men with which He has communicated have written His words in the Bible. Those who are born-again Christians communicate with God on a daily basis. There is a test, based on the ontological evidence against God, that you can do to try the existence of God.

  2. "The Ontological Argument fails to prove God's existence"

    There can be no 'perfect' God, because it is impossible to understand what truly perfect is - different people have different concepts of God. The extent of 'perfection' is infinitive - for example, what makes a 'perfect' basketball player? How many baskets would he have to shoot?

  1. "Modern visions of the Ontological Argument are more successful than early versions"

    Russell argues that people are confusing first and second order predicates; so while the cow has first order predicates such as hoofs and ears (material properties), the unicorn only has second order predicates ( conceptual properties). So, he argued that God can only be thought of in terms of second order predicates.

  2. Does God Exist?

    Therefore God must exist in reality as well as in the imagination, because if he just existed in the imagination then there could logically be 'a being greater than can be concieved' in reality. There is no chance of God not existing because he exists in our minds, and Anslem

  1. Explain the Ontological argument.

    and the sides (predicate) then the triangle is left with no contradiction. One can define an object as one sees fit, but this definition does not always meet the definition in real life. Descartes then goes on to argue that existence is not a predicate.

  2. Shared Traits of the Christian, Islamic and Jewish Interpretations of Their Common God, and ...

    * Ability to destroy matter, energy and supernatural substances is implied but not stated * Omniscient o Has infinite wisdom o Has infinite knowledge o Has infinite perception * Demands Service o Has a chosen people o Grants free will, but demands total obedience o Is forgiving of the repentant,

  1. The Ontological Argument

    If God does not exist then he cannot come into existence for if he did he would be nothing more than a contingent being which would make him a limited being. Since he cannot come into exist, if he does not exist then his existence is impossible.

  2. The ontological argument

    Basically Anselm claimed that God's existence is necessary by the very nature of the definition of God. Gaunilo of Marmountiers who also lived in the eleventh century, was one of the earliest recorded theologians to criticise Anselm's argument for God by definition.

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