• 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. Evaluate Descartes Method of Doubt

    By using his senses. His argument here is self-refuting, and in my opinion severely damages this first wave. One major problem with the second wave of doubt is the way Descartes words it. He claims 'there are no conclusive signs by means of which one can distinguish clearly between being awake and being asleep'

  2. The Ontological Argument - Critique

    these objects would be perfect, they cannot be compared to god, as God is defined as that than which no greater can be conceived - We could name myriad objects, which within their own belonging would be perfect, however when subjected to other perfect objects, who is to decided which is greater, and therefore the greatest conceivable being?

  1. Cosmological argument

    within space and time because they are only existent after the beginning of the universe making it wrong to apply events from within the universe to the universe as a whole. If the notion of cause does not stand the Kalam argument does not work.

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

    Gods existence because a lot of Anselm and Descartes argument relies on the assumption that God exists, and an atheist would not have this believe. The ontological argument is also an A priori argument using no evidence for concrete support and therefore relying on logic alone, this contributes to the


    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.

  2. Explain Descartes' Ontological Argument

    actually exists.? Descartes then refutes this point by saying that the relationship between God and existence is not like the relationship between mountain and existence, but rather the relationship between mountain and valley. Just as the idea of a valley is implied by the idea of a mountain, the idea of existence is implied by the idea of God.

  1. Explain Anselms ontological argument.

    to say that there existed an island which was the most excellent and possessed an inestimable wealth, we can easily understand this; even a fool can comprehend this. And therefore it is the most excellent, and it is more excellent to exist both in reality and in understanding moreover this island must exist.

  2. Explain Anselm and Descartes ontological argument

    Similarly, Gaunilo argues against the ontological argument. Gaunilo argues that if the greatest conceivable island can be conceived, does mean that is has to necessarily exist; it is absurd to state that just because something can be thought of does it have to exist.

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