SlideShare a Scribd company logo
2
Most read
6
Most read
7
Most read
Anselm’s Ontological
Argument
L/O – I will be able to explain Anselm’s two
ontological arguments, and start to assess
Gaunilo’s response.
‘Fools say in their hearts, “There is no God”’
Psalm 14:1
Copy this statement down. What do you think it is trying to suggest and
why?
A predicate is…
‘an intrinsic property or quality of something’
Predicates of an elephant might be…
A trunk, size, long ears, being a mammal,
tusks, long memory, etc…
Predicates of…?


The Earth



A Car



A Human


Anselm’s essential claim is…

Existence is a predicate of God (it is a
property or quality of God’s nature).
Anselm’s First Argument
1)
2)
3)

God is the greatest possible being which can be
conceived (thought) of.
God may exist either in the mind alone, or in reality
as well.
Something which exists in reality and in the mind
is greater than something which exists just as an
idea in the mind alone.

Conclusion:
4) God must exist in reality and in the mind (or we have
not thought of the greatest possible being).
Features of the first argument
(for an essay plan).
1)

2)
3)
4)
5)

‘a being which nothing greater can be conceived’:
Anselm expects everyone will accept this
definition.
Painter and painting analogy (mind and reality).
Reductio ad absurdum – if he does exist in the
mind alone then he is not greatest possible being.
God’s existence is analytic (once we analyse the
definition of the term we will see that God exists).
Anyone who doesn’t accept it is a ‘fool’, as it is
plain and obvious.
Anselm’s second argument
1)
2)

God is that being nothing greater than
which can be thought of.
Something which cannot be thought not to
exist is greater than anything which can be
thought not to exist.

Conclusion:
3) Therefore, it is impossible to think that this
being (God) cannot exist.
Argument 2: In simpler
language…
You can’t think of anything greater
than God.
2) Necessary things are greater than
contingent things.
Conclusion
1)

3) God is necessary
Features of Anselm’s
second argument
1) This adds the idea that it is impossible
for God not to exist – in other words,
God is necessary.
2) It has been argued that his second
argument was aimed at believers as a
proof that existence in God is rational
– to justify a belief in God.
Gaunilo’s response


Gaunilo was a contemporary of Anselm, he was a
monk who rejected Anselm’s argument in ‘On
Behalf of the fool’ using three arguments….

1)

On Gossip – the fool could have all kinds of made
up things in his head, gossip for instance is
unreliable – how should he be able to discern what
is true and what is not?
You can’t define things into existence
The Perfect Island

2)
3)
The Perfect Island


Think of some other examples you
could include to demonstrate the point
about the Perfect Island in an essay…


Plantinga – Islands are different to
God – there could always be a more
perfect Island - more dancing girls,
more lush palm trees, twice the size,
etc. – idea of a greatest possible
island is incoherent. God on the other
hand is maximally great – nothing
greater is possible.
Homework
Use the info in this Powerpoint and the
last (they’re on moodle) to write an
essay plan for ‘Explain Anselm’s
ontological arguments…’ (25 marks).
 Pick three main points and write out
three paragraphs.
For next lesson


More Related Content

PPTX
Introduction to Theology
PPTX
The ontological argument
PPTX
Does god exist
PPT
The ontological argument
PPT
A2 The Problem Of Evil
PPTX
Lesson 5 the problem of evil
PPT
Rene Descartes[1][1][1]
 
DOCX
Argument Forms
Introduction to Theology
The ontological argument
Does god exist
The ontological argument
A2 The Problem Of Evil
Lesson 5 the problem of evil
Rene Descartes[1][1][1]
 
Argument Forms

What's hot (20)

PPTX
Existence of god
PPT
Rationalism report
PPTX
Saint thomas aquinas
PPTX
JS Mill's Utilitarianism
PPTX
Augustine's Theodicy
DOCX
Philosophy and religion
PPT
Theology ppt
PPT
RENAISSANCE AND MODERN PHILOSOPHERS (from 14th to 17th Century)
PPTX
ARISTOTLE PHILOSOPHY
PDF
4 Descartes, Rationalism and the Enlightenment
PPT
SPINOZA'S PHILOSOPHY
PPTX
Rationalism
PDF
Religious experience
PPT
Proofs for the Existence of God Powerpoint
DOCX
Thomas aquinas 5
PPT
01 quiz sin
PDF
The Political Ideas of St. Thomas Aquinas
PPT
Rationalism
Existence of god
Rationalism report
Saint thomas aquinas
JS Mill's Utilitarianism
Augustine's Theodicy
Philosophy and religion
Theology ppt
RENAISSANCE AND MODERN PHILOSOPHERS (from 14th to 17th Century)
ARISTOTLE PHILOSOPHY
4 Descartes, Rationalism and the Enlightenment
SPINOZA'S PHILOSOPHY
Rationalism
Religious experience
Proofs for the Existence of God Powerpoint
Thomas aquinas 5
01 quiz sin
The Political Ideas of St. Thomas Aquinas
Rationalism
Ad

Viewers also liked (9)

PPTX
The cosmological argument Russell and Copleston debate
PPT
1-31
PPTX
The Cosmological Argument
PPT
A2 Ontological
PPT
The Design Argument
PPTX
Introduction of business ethics
PDF
Business Ethics
PPTX
Business ethics
PPTX
The cosmological argument Russell and Copleston debate
1-31
The Cosmological Argument
A2 Ontological
The Design Argument
Introduction of business ethics
Business Ethics
Business ethics
Ad

Similar to 2. anselm s_ontological_argument (1) (20)

PPT
PDF
Anselm S Ontological Argument And Its Critics
PPTX
Ontological
PPTX
Anselm in Context .pptx
PDF
Ontological Argument Essay
DOCX
r ,-,.. Unit 0 An Introduction to Thinking Crit.docx
PPTX
AQA Religious Studies Unit 3 complete revision
DOCX
A Primer on the Philosophy of Religion and the Problem of God's Existence (pa...
DOCX
Philo106 final paper
PPT
Theistic proofs for god
PPTX
Existence of God and Problem of Evil
PDF
PDF
ANSELMS ONTOLOGICAL ARGUMENT
PPT
9-21
PPT
Theistic proofs for god
PPT
Ch4ppt velasquez12
DOC
Philosophy of Religion- Arguments
PDF
Philosophy of religion synthesis
PPTX
Religious language
PDF
Does God Exist Essay
Anselm S Ontological Argument And Its Critics
Ontological
Anselm in Context .pptx
Ontological Argument Essay
r ,-,.. Unit 0 An Introduction to Thinking Crit.docx
AQA Religious Studies Unit 3 complete revision
A Primer on the Philosophy of Religion and the Problem of God's Existence (pa...
Philo106 final paper
Theistic proofs for god
Existence of God and Problem of Evil
ANSELMS ONTOLOGICAL ARGUMENT
9-21
Theistic proofs for god
Ch4ppt velasquez12
Philosophy of Religion- Arguments
Philosophy of religion synthesis
Religious language
Does God Exist Essay

More from eilisbell (11)

PPTX
Titles
PPTX
Masthead anaylsis
PPTX
First annotations
PPTX
Original image
PPTX
Annotations 4
PPTX
Orginal image
PPTX
Black and white edit
PPTX
Presentation1 marta cage
PPTX
Annotations
DOCX
Annotation for cage marta
PPTX
Presentation2[1] (1)
Titles
Masthead anaylsis
First annotations
Original image
Annotations 4
Orginal image
Black and white edit
Presentation1 marta cage
Annotations
Annotation for cage marta
Presentation2[1] (1)

2. anselm s_ontological_argument (1)

  • 1. Anselm’s Ontological Argument L/O – I will be able to explain Anselm’s two ontological arguments, and start to assess Gaunilo’s response. ‘Fools say in their hearts, “There is no God”’ Psalm 14:1 Copy this statement down. What do you think it is trying to suggest and why?
  • 2. A predicate is… ‘an intrinsic property or quality of something’ Predicates of an elephant might be… A trunk, size, long ears, being a mammal, tusks, long memory, etc…
  • 4.  Anselm’s essential claim is… Existence is a predicate of God (it is a property or quality of God’s nature).
  • 5. Anselm’s First Argument 1) 2) 3) God is the greatest possible being which can be conceived (thought) of. God may exist either in the mind alone, or in reality as well. Something which exists in reality and in the mind is greater than something which exists just as an idea in the mind alone. Conclusion: 4) God must exist in reality and in the mind (or we have not thought of the greatest possible being).
  • 6. Features of the first argument (for an essay plan). 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) ‘a being which nothing greater can be conceived’: Anselm expects everyone will accept this definition. Painter and painting analogy (mind and reality). Reductio ad absurdum – if he does exist in the mind alone then he is not greatest possible being. God’s existence is analytic (once we analyse the definition of the term we will see that God exists). Anyone who doesn’t accept it is a ‘fool’, as it is plain and obvious.
  • 7. Anselm’s second argument 1) 2) God is that being nothing greater than which can be thought of. Something which cannot be thought not to exist is greater than anything which can be thought not to exist. Conclusion: 3) Therefore, it is impossible to think that this being (God) cannot exist.
  • 8. Argument 2: In simpler language… You can’t think of anything greater than God. 2) Necessary things are greater than contingent things. Conclusion 1) 3) God is necessary
  • 9. Features of Anselm’s second argument 1) This adds the idea that it is impossible for God not to exist – in other words, God is necessary. 2) It has been argued that his second argument was aimed at believers as a proof that existence in God is rational – to justify a belief in God.
  • 10. Gaunilo’s response  Gaunilo was a contemporary of Anselm, he was a monk who rejected Anselm’s argument in ‘On Behalf of the fool’ using three arguments…. 1) On Gossip – the fool could have all kinds of made up things in his head, gossip for instance is unreliable – how should he be able to discern what is true and what is not? You can’t define things into existence The Perfect Island 2) 3)
  • 12.  Think of some other examples you could include to demonstrate the point about the Perfect Island in an essay…
  • 13.  Plantinga – Islands are different to God – there could always be a more perfect Island - more dancing girls, more lush palm trees, twice the size, etc. – idea of a greatest possible island is incoherent. God on the other hand is maximally great – nothing greater is possible.
  • 14. Homework Use the info in this Powerpoint and the last (they’re on moodle) to write an essay plan for ‘Explain Anselm’s ontological arguments…’ (25 marks).  Pick three main points and write out three paragraphs. For next lesson 