The Ontological Argument

An argument a priori

The Ontological Argument: St. Anselm:

It is a conceptual truth (true by definition) that God is a being than
which none greater can be imagined (that is, the greatest possible
being that can be imagined).
God exists as an idea in the mind.
A being that exists as an idea in the mind and in reality is, other
things being equal, greater than a being that exists only as an idea
in the mind.
Thus, if God exists only as an idea in the mind, then we can imagine
something that is greater than God (that is, a greatest possible
being that does exist).
But we cannot imagine something that is greater than God (for it is
a contradiction to suppose that we can imagine a being greater
than the greatest possible being that can be imagined.)
Therefore, God exists.

Premise 1: It is a conceptual truth (true by definition) that God

is a being than which none greater can be imagined (that is,
the greatest possible being that can be imagined).
It is true by definition that God is a being than which none
greater can be imagined.
Expressed in Premise 1 is the idea that conceptually, Gods
nature is such that God can do all things possible.
We have an idea of a being that represents perfection and
greatness.
No possible being can be greater than God.

Ideas Behind the Ontological Argument

Premise 2: God exists as an idea in the mind.

Premise 2 establishes the understanding as if it were a
place.
If I understand claims about God, then it is possible to say that
God exists in my understanding.
Even the Fool must agree to at least this premise.
It is one thing for an object to exist in my understanding and
another for me to understand that it exists, actually.
Consider actually existing things, such as tables, desks,
computers, in contrast to things which dont exist except
conceptually: unicorns, zombies, the philosophers stone.

Ideas Behind the Ontological Argument

Premise 3: A being that exists as an idea in the mind and in

reality is, other things being equal, greater than a being that
exists only as an idea in the mind.
Premise 3 asserts that existence is a perfection, or greatmaking property.
A being that exists as an idea in the mind AND in reality is
greater than a being that exists only as an idea in the mind.
Something that has existence is greater than it would have
been had it lacked existence.
Any existing thing is greater than every non-existing thing.
That which exists in reality is greater than in the mind alone.

Ideas Behind the Ontological Argument

Premise 4: Thus, if God exists only as an idea in the mind, then

we can imagine something that is greater than God (that is, a
greatest possible being that does exist).
Premise 4 suggests that we can imagine something that is greater than
that which exists in the understanding alone: something that also exists in
reality.
This would imply that we can imagine something that is greater than Goda greatest possible being that does exist actually.
Reductio ad absurdum: Premise 4 would reduce Anselms argument to an
absurdity.
Further, this would mean that God would lack a perfection: existence.
If we say that a being greater than the greatest is possible, we contradict
Premise 1.
A perfect being must have all perfections, including existence.
Therefore, God exists.
Ideas Behind the Ontological Argument

Premise 5: But we cannot imagine something that is greater

than God. Therefore, God exists.
It is a contradiction to suppose that we can imagine a being greater
than the greatest possible being that can be imagined.
In Conclusion:
Anselm of Canterbury defined God as the greatest possible being
we can conceive and argued that this being could exist in the mind.
He suggested that, if the greatest possible being exists in the mind,
it must also exist in reality.
If it only exists in the mind, a greater being is possible - one which
exists in the mind and in reality.
In more layman terms, God is a perfect being. A perfect being must
have all perfections. Existence is a perfection.
Therefore, God must have existence. God must exist. To deny this is
self-contradictory.
Ideas Behind the Ontological Argument

Descartes Ontological Argument, from Meditation V:

In our thoughts we apprehend ideas of things. These ideas may reside
entirely within our thoughts or they may exist independent of our
considerations of them (Descartes, 88).
Descartes argues that the idea of God is that He is a supremely perfect
being (88).
He claims that existence can no more be separated from Gods essence
than that the idea of a valley can be separated from the idea of a
mountain (89).
From the fact that I cannot think of God except as existing, it follows that
existence is inseparable from God, and for that reason he really exists
(89).
Because our idea of God is one of absolute perfection, and existence
contains more reality than nonexistent thoughts alone, God exists.
I am not free to think of God without existence, that is, a supremely
perfect being without a supreme perfection.

Descartes Ontological Argument continued

(1) In our thoughts we experience an idea of the most perfect
being.
(2) Existence in reality is more perfect than existence in our
thoughts alone.
Therefore, (3) the most perfect being exists in reality.
Descartes wishes to argue that existence is a perfection and
hence it belongs to those characteristics of the divine nature.
However, a thing cannot possess a characteristic unless it first
exists.

Gaunilos Criticism of St. Anselm

An early objection (made in St. Anselm's own time) to the
Ontological Argument was made by a Benedictine monk
named Gaunilo. Gaunilo points out that Anselm's argument is
too strong. If the Ontological Argument were valid, we could
prove the existence of a lot of things which just don't exist.
How can we possibly derive the real existence of something
from a mere idea of it? We might as well conclude that from
our idea of a perfect, desert island that such an island actually
exists.
Gaunilo sought to prove that Anselms reasoning is mistaken
by applying it to things other than God, things which we know
dont exist.

Gaunilos Objection:
The Lost Island is that than which no greater can be
conceived.
It is greater to exist in reality than merely as an idea.
If the Lost Island does not exist, one can conceive of an even
greater island, that is one that does exist.
Therefore, the Lost Island exists in reality.

Gaunilos Objection
Gaunilo supposes that his perfect island is a possible thing.
This requires us to believe that some finite, limited thing (an island) might
have unlimited perfections.
Perhaps such an island is an impossible thing.
No matter how great any island is, it is always possible to imagine an
island even greater. Ex: abundant fruit, maximum sunshine.
But unlike the Island, the concept of God as Anselm conceives it:
omniscience, omnipotence, moral goodness do have intrinsic maximums:
it is conceptually impossible to know more than knowing the most, to be
more powerful than the most powerful (to do more than it is possible to
do)
The notion of a greatest possible being assumes that each property is
present in the highest degree.

Kants Objection
Is existence really a perfection?
Taking aim at Premise 3, Kant claims existence is not a
predicate.
It functions grammatically like a predicate, but it is not a real
predicate. It tells us nothing about the subject.
This is because existence is not a quality or predicate that
adds to the greatness of a thing.
Existence is not a property (in the way that being red is a
property of an apple).

Kants Objection:
A unicorn (is white). A unicorn (has an ivory horn). A unicorn
(is shaped like a horse). A unicorn (exists).
Adding existence to the unicorn doesnt change the subject
unicorn; it doesnt change what a unicorn is or what our idea
of a unicorn is.
The existence of God similarly, stands in a different relation to
God than his regular attributes of omnipotence, omniscience,
and supreme goodness.