Conceptions of God: The Ontological Argument

In this video I outline the Ontological argument - its strengths and weaknesses.

I go through various criticisms that have been made by philosophers such as Kant and Gaunilo, as well as rebutting these and adding my own interjections. The criticisms that aren't credited are my own.

I myself am agnostic. If you have any questions, feel free to ask. Send me a message if your comments and questions are extensive.

Category:

Education

Tags:

• anselm
• gaunilo
• kant
• descartes
• philosophy
• classical
• conception
• jesus
• christianity
• buddhism
• religion
• hinduism
• chelevsara
• acharya
• zeitgeist
• priori
• reason
• logic
• deductive
• analytic
• proposition
• synthetic
• marxist
• economic
• determinism
• conspiracy
• alex
• jones
• jordan
• maxwell
• agnostic
• agnosticism
• atheist
• atheism
• deist
• deism
• theist
• theism

[bommobiel]

1. IF God exists, he is the greatest being

2. existence is greater than non existence

conclusion: If God exists, God exists. Good job figuring that out!

[dudekin]

@bommobiel Reflect upon the argument some more, you seem to have misunderstood it.

[dudekin]

@Ataensic You've misunderstood the argument.

[jmeiro]

Second, the proof never really addresses why God is a necessity. Once again, before using other proofs to reaffirm God's existence, we have to look to this proof in a vacuum, and it truly never mentions why God is a necessity.

[jmeiro]

In addition, the first part follows illogical thinking. Its basically saying: "God, if he exists, is the greatest being in existence. If god was both existent in the mind and in the world, then he would be the greatest being in existence." This never really means that God exists, its just that if he did exist, he would be the greatest being in existence.

[jmeiro]

Lets examine this proof in a vacuum first. Say there are no other proofs of God's existence. We would be unable to jump to the conclusion that God exists without the completion of the proof. Therefore, it would be vital to assume that god may or may not exist. As God's existence is already known to be in question, he cannot be the greatest being in existence. Therefore the rest of the proof breaks down.

[sebastian30000]

You cannot prove existence through a priori knowledge. It is illogical.

[CeltoSaxonKnight]

@CeltoSaxonKnight

2) ...where a logical necessity is not so (I think we agree on that at least.)

In the case of numbers they necessarily exist as a consequence of logical necessity. In a sense the Ontological Argument is an attempt to show logical necessity from 'per se esse' – that is, a being that is necessary by dint of its own attributes. And here a problem does arise... But that problem has nothing to do with unicorns or being able to imagine a possible world without an MGB.

[CeltoSaxonKnight]

@Stairc

1) “There is no entailment from 'x has necessary existence' to 'necessarily, x exists'. - Oxford Companion To Philosophy. 1995.”

Necessary existence means an existence not contingent on any other thing. Meaning some act, event or other being that would necessarily disallow the being existence. Simply imagining that a world exists without an MGB does not disallow its acceptance as a necessary being.

In contradistinction it is not possible to imagine a world...

(cont'd)

[Stairc]

@CeltoSaxonKnight 1) The only things that exist in all possible worlds are those that are REQUIRED for the imagination of a world in the first place. As it is impossible to imagine a world completely empty of entities, and entities are not required for a hypothetical world to begin with, there is no such thing as a MGB under your definition.

2) The ONLY aspect that matters for this flawed argument is that the being is maximally present (i.e. the thing that, when maximixed, makes it exist in all

[CeltoSaxonKnight]

@Stairc

It is true that one cannot imagine a PW where a necessity truth is not so (eg, 1+1=3 or a 4 sided triangle). However one can imagine a PW where a necessary entity doesn't exist. This is because logical necessity & necessary existence are 2 different categories.

~~~~

A MGB is the only being of which one can assert EPW on the basis of its own attributes. Just stating that a unicorn has EPW for no reason is unwarranted.