SlideShare a Scribd company logo
9
Most read
13
Most read
14
Most read
Homework
Listen to and read the Russell & Copleston Debate.
Fill in the answers on the question sheet for next
lesson (THURSDAY)
You will find it on the shared area Wdrive-RE-SM-
Philosophy-homework
The Ontological Argument: An Introduction
Learning Outcomes:
ALL will be able to explain the Ontological argument.
MOST will be able to analyse the strengths and weakness of the
ontological argument
SOME will be able to explain the significance of the ontological argument
in the context of the other arguments for the existence of God
January 19, 2015
Starter Task:
What is greater?
A priori or a posteriori knowledge?
 This triangle has 3 sides.
(a priori)
 The nearest station to Latimer is Kettering
station.
(a posteriori)
 The sun will rise tomorrow.
(a posteriori)
 The apple I am going to eat for lunch is a fruit.
(a priori)
 Jesus was the son of God.
(a posteriori) Learning Outcomes:
 ALL will be able to explain the Ontological argument.
 MOST will be able to analyse the strengths and
weakness of the ontological argument
 SOME will be able to explain the significance of the
ontological argument in the context of the other
arguments for the existence of God
A priori – a proposition based on a definition
and the use of logic alone, no experience
needed.
A posteriori – a proposition based upon
experience alone.
 Learning Outcomes:
 ALL will be able to explain the Ontological argument.
 MOST will be able to analyse the strengths and
weakness of the ontological argument
 SOME will be able to explain the significance of the
ontological argument in the context of the other
arguments for the existence of God
A definition of God
 Take a couple of minutes to think of
a definition of God.
 Make a list of the attributes of the
attributes of God.
 Learning Outcomes:
 ALL will be able to explain the Ontological argument.
 MOST will be able to analyse the strengths and
weakness of the ontological argument
 SOME will be able to explain the significance of the
ontological argument in the context of the other
arguments for the existence of God
Perfection = ?
Anselm says
 God is “that than which
nothing greater can be
conceived”
 “you can’t imagine anything
greater than God”
 “God is perfect in every way”
Anselm Says:
 If God is perfect in every way he
must exist in reality
 If he existed only in the mind we
could imagine a more perfect God –
one that existed in the mind and in
reality
God
God
+
Ontological Argument in a nutshell
- Something is greater if it exists
than if it doesn’t.
- If God is the greatest thing
imaginable, he must exist. For if he
didn’t, you could imagine something
greater – something with all his
qualities, but which did actually
exist. Learning Outcomes:
 ALL will be able to explain the Ontological argument.
 MOST will be able to analyse the strengths and
weakness of the ontological argument
 SOME will be able to explain the significance of the
ontological argument in the context of the other
arguments for the existence of God
Inductive and deductive
arguments
 All the other arguments for the
existence of God are inductive –
they can at best only give a
highly probable conclusion.
 Inductive arguments are based
upon a posteriori knowledge
– knowledge derived from (after)
experience.
Argument Experience
Teleological
Cosmological
Moral
 Learning Outcomes:
 ALL will be able to explain the Ontological argument.
 MOST will be able to analyse the strengths and
weakness of the ontological argument
 SOME will be able to explain the significance of the
ontological argument in the context of the other
arguments for the existence of God
Inductive/deductive
cont’d…
 A deductive argument is based upon a priori knowledge.
 The conclusion is implied directly by the premises, i.e. flows
directly from them.
 If the premises are true and the structure is valid, then the
conclusion must be true.
 The Ontological Argument is the only deductive argument
for the existence of God.
→ This means ontological arguments are the only arguments
that could…
prove God’s existence conclusively
Task
 You will watch these clips and use the question
sheet to help you learn about the ontological
arguments and the arguments against it.
 You will have 45 mins to complete this.
 Part 1
 Part 2
 When you finish you need to attempt this 10 mark
question:
‘‘The ontological argument is convincing’ DiscusThe ontological argument is convincing’ Discus
The Ontological Argument
Ontological. (From the Greek ontos,
meaning being.)
Lesson objectives:
•DESCRIBE the ontological argument (Grade E & D)
•EXPLAIN the strengths and weaknesses of the
ontological argument (Grade C)
•EVALUATE the ontological argument and express
your own view of it. (Grade B & A)
January 19, 2015
Anselm’s argument
Anselm says that the definition, or essence, of God includes existence: God is a
perfect being, i.e. one than which none greater can be conceived.
HOW DOES THIS WORK? Lets say…
1. God exists in the understanding, but not in reality.
2. However, one can conceive of a being that not only exists in the
understanding, but also in reality itself.
3. A being that exists both in the understanding and in reality is greater
than a being that exists solely in the understanding.
4. Hence, one can conceive of a being greater than God.
Contradiction – reject premise 1.
But the problem here is that, even if one shows that ‘God
exists’ is an analytic truth, all one has done is say that
existence is a necessary property of the concept ‘God’.
What is an analytic statement?
SO if you said, “cold, white
snow”, or “a duffle coat with
toggles on it” you wouldn’t be
wrong, but you wouldn’t be
saying anything we couldn’t
already have worked out if we
knew the definition of the word.
An analytic statement tells us nothing about the world,
is just a definition…
AND we wouldn’t know whether any duffle coats or snow actually exist. If a
crazy, duffle-coat-hating person destroyed all the duffle coats in the world,
would duffle coats still have toggles on?
Remember Plato?
Plato used the idea that each thing has an
essence without which it wouldn’t be what it is.
Can you remember what Plato called the
essence, or paradigm, of things that actually
exist in the world? And how we can know about
them?
But does it make sense to say that things have
some kind of existence (somewhere, if not in
the visible realm) just because we can
conceive of them?
(Anselm had described God as perfect
goodness which causes goodness in
everything he creates. Sound familiar?)
Spot the difference…
Can you tell that one of these dogs actually exists and one
doesn’t just from the ideas of the dogs?
Gaunilo thought not
He said
1: we can’t conceive of
perfection – we have no
experience of such a thing,
and
2: just because you can
conceive of something (he
used the example of an
island), doesn’t make it
exist. If the fact that you
think you can conceive of
an existing island makes it
exist, your argument must
be flawed.
Discussion Question 1:
What would Plato have said about this?
Discussion Question 2:
What do you think? Can you conceive of
something you have no experience of? Infinity
and eternity?
Discussion Question 3:
Is this true? If you say you are
conceiving of an island that exists,
you’d know really that it didn’t. You
wouldn’t really being conceiving of an
existing island, you’d know you were
kidding yourself.
Descartes had his own version
of the ontological argument
Descartes has an idea of God as being one, perfect being.
Plato thought that we gain knowledge of concepts by
recollecting the time when we resided in the realm of Forms.
Descartes thought that we must have got our knowledge of
perfection from God, because we can have no experience of
perfection in this life. Unlike Plato he doesn’t believe in a cycle
of rebirth, but he does believe that God has imprinted some
knowledge on us so that we know certain things whatever
experience we have had in the world. Descartes says that we
get our knowledge of God from God, who has left his imprint
on our souls like the trademark a craftsman leaves on his work.
Question: Is this feasible? Do you think we have any innate
knowledge? What?
Some background
 Descartes’ ontological argument featured in his
book Meditations
 His aim of this book was to doubt everything
that he could possibly… to see what it was he
that he could not doubt (methodological
scepticism)
His answer; the one thing he could not doubt was
….
That he existed
“I think, therefore I am”
3 minute philosophy
Good break down of Rene’s philosophy
Next he enquired into the existence of God to see
if he could be a deceiver.
→ He realised that he had within him a clear and
distinct idea of a Perfect God, which did not and
could not originate in him as a corporeal (physical,
finite) substance.
God must exist as the cause of this idea.
I think…
Both Anselm’s and Descartes’ starting point was
that God exists.
What do you think?
Task: Write Anselm’s argument for the
existence of God in bullet points. Make this the
centre of a mind map. Add on Gaunilo’s
criticisms and Kant’s criticism. Then add on your
views.
Use your text books to make additional notes
on the arguments

More Related Content

PDF
Religious experience
PPT
Rationalism and Empiricism
PPTX
The ontological argument
PPTX
The teleological argument
PPT
A2 The Problem Of Evil
PPT
Proofs for the Existence of God Powerpoint
PPT
SPINOZA'S PHILOSOPHY
PPTX
The problem of evil
Religious experience
Rationalism and Empiricism
The ontological argument
The teleological argument
A2 The Problem Of Evil
Proofs for the Existence of God Powerpoint
SPINOZA'S PHILOSOPHY
The problem of evil

What's hot (20)

PPT
Philosophy of religion
KEY
The Design Argument
PPTX
Existence of God - Does God really exist?
PPT
Rationalism
PPT
Faith And Reason
PPT
Mind Body Problem
PPT
Rationalist epistemology – rene descartes
PPT
2. anselm s_ontological_argument (1)
PPTX
The Essentials of Apologetics - Why Apologetics?
PPTX
The Essentials of Apologetics Why God (Part 3)?
PPTX
Lesson 5 the problem of evil
PPT
Rationalism
PPTX
Theory of knowledge
PPTX
Fallacies
PPTX
Does god exist
PPTX
Gottlob Frege's Sense and Reference
PPTX
What is Skepticism?
PPTX
Problem of evil arguments slides
PPTX
Logic FORMAL FALLACIES
PDF
What is the meaning of life
Philosophy of religion
The Design Argument
Existence of God - Does God really exist?
Rationalism
Faith And Reason
Mind Body Problem
Rationalist epistemology – rene descartes
2. anselm s_ontological_argument (1)
The Essentials of Apologetics - Why Apologetics?
The Essentials of Apologetics Why God (Part 3)?
Lesson 5 the problem of evil
Rationalism
Theory of knowledge
Fallacies
Does god exist
Gottlob Frege's Sense and Reference
What is Skepticism?
Problem of evil arguments slides
Logic FORMAL FALLACIES
What is the meaning of life
Ad

Viewers also liked (15)

PPT
A2 Ontological
PPTX
Ontological
PPT
Design Argument
PDF
Teleological argument
PPT
Chapter 3
DOCX
Rules of inference
PDF
Cosmological Argument
PPTX
The Cosmological Argument
PPT
Rehearsing artaud
PPT
Chapter 7: Deontology
DOCX
Artaudian techniques
PPTX
Deontological ethics
PPT
The Design Argument
PPTX
The Cosmological Argument
PPTX
Deontological ethics 3.2
A2 Ontological
Ontological
Design Argument
Teleological argument
Chapter 3
Rules of inference
Cosmological Argument
The Cosmological Argument
Rehearsing artaud
Chapter 7: Deontology
Artaudian techniques
Deontological ethics
The Design Argument
The Cosmological Argument
Deontological ethics 3.2
Ad

Similar to The ontological argument (20)

PPT
Theistic proofs for god
PPT
Theistic proofs for god
PPTX
Anselm in Context .pptx
PDF
DOCX
How do I Know Whether God exists? Philosophy Essay
PDF
Theistic proofs for god
PPTX
The cosmological argument Russell and Copleston debate
DOCX
Philo106 final paper
PPT
Vgt8vg5gc 1637254957236-prese
PPT
Kreeft3 existence god
DOCX
First concept or thought of god
PPTX
Existence of God and Problem of Evil
PPT
St. Ann Philosophy, Matter and Form, Proofs of God's Existence, Nov. 16, 2018...
PPTX
Class # 4 Sunday May 3rd. Does Absoulte Truth Exist? A Basic Guide to Christi...
DOCX
A Primer on the Philosophy of Religion and the Problem of God's Existence (pa...
PDF
Rational belief in god (cosmological arguments for dummies)
PPT
A2 Cosmological
PPTX
3.Where is the mind?
PPTX
Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz Sufficient Reason.pptx
DOCX
Thomas aquinas 5
Theistic proofs for god
Theistic proofs for god
Anselm in Context .pptx
How do I Know Whether God exists? Philosophy Essay
Theistic proofs for god
The cosmological argument Russell and Copleston debate
Philo106 final paper
Vgt8vg5gc 1637254957236-prese
Kreeft3 existence god
First concept or thought of god
Existence of God and Problem of Evil
St. Ann Philosophy, Matter and Form, Proofs of God's Existence, Nov. 16, 2018...
Class # 4 Sunday May 3rd. Does Absoulte Truth Exist? A Basic Guide to Christi...
A Primer on the Philosophy of Religion and the Problem of God's Existence (pa...
Rational belief in god (cosmological arguments for dummies)
A2 Cosmological
3.Where is the mind?
Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz Sufficient Reason.pptx
Thomas aquinas 5

Recently uploaded (20)

PDF
Origin of periodic table-Mendeleev’s Periodic-Modern Periodic table
PDF
STATICS OF THE RIGID BODIES Hibbelers.pdf
PPTX
Introduction to Child Health Nursing – Unit I | Child Health Nursing I | B.Sc...
PDF
Anesthesia in Laparoscopic Surgery in India
PPTX
Pharma ospi slides which help in ospi learning
PDF
Supply Chain Operations Speaking Notes -ICLT Program
PDF
VCE English Exam - Section C Student Revision Booklet
PDF
TR - Agricultural Crops Production NC III.pdf
PDF
Abdominal Access Techniques with Prof. Dr. R K Mishra
PDF
BÀI TẬP BỔ TRỢ 4 KỸ NĂNG TIẾNG ANH 9 GLOBAL SUCCESS - CẢ NĂM - BÁM SÁT FORM Đ...
PDF
Saundersa Comprehensive Review for the NCLEX-RN Examination.pdf
PPTX
Week 4 Term 3 Study Techniques revisited.pptx
PDF
Physiotherapy_for_Respiratory_and_Cardiac_Problems WEBBER.pdf
PDF
Basic Mud Logging Guide for educational purpose
PPTX
BOWEL ELIMINATION FACTORS AFFECTING AND TYPES
PPTX
PPH.pptx obstetrics and gynecology in nursing
PPTX
PPT- ENG7_QUARTER1_LESSON1_WEEK1. IMAGERY -DESCRIPTIONS pptx.pptx
PDF
O5-L3 Freight Transport Ops (International) V1.pdf
PDF
Complications of Minimal Access Surgery at WLH
PPTX
The Healthy Child – Unit II | Child Health Nursing I | B.Sc Nursing 5th Semester
Origin of periodic table-Mendeleev’s Periodic-Modern Periodic table
STATICS OF THE RIGID BODIES Hibbelers.pdf
Introduction to Child Health Nursing – Unit I | Child Health Nursing I | B.Sc...
Anesthesia in Laparoscopic Surgery in India
Pharma ospi slides which help in ospi learning
Supply Chain Operations Speaking Notes -ICLT Program
VCE English Exam - Section C Student Revision Booklet
TR - Agricultural Crops Production NC III.pdf
Abdominal Access Techniques with Prof. Dr. R K Mishra
BÀI TẬP BỔ TRỢ 4 KỸ NĂNG TIẾNG ANH 9 GLOBAL SUCCESS - CẢ NĂM - BÁM SÁT FORM Đ...
Saundersa Comprehensive Review for the NCLEX-RN Examination.pdf
Week 4 Term 3 Study Techniques revisited.pptx
Physiotherapy_for_Respiratory_and_Cardiac_Problems WEBBER.pdf
Basic Mud Logging Guide for educational purpose
BOWEL ELIMINATION FACTORS AFFECTING AND TYPES
PPH.pptx obstetrics and gynecology in nursing
PPT- ENG7_QUARTER1_LESSON1_WEEK1. IMAGERY -DESCRIPTIONS pptx.pptx
O5-L3 Freight Transport Ops (International) V1.pdf
Complications of Minimal Access Surgery at WLH
The Healthy Child – Unit II | Child Health Nursing I | B.Sc Nursing 5th Semester

The ontological argument

  • 1. Homework Listen to and read the Russell & Copleston Debate. Fill in the answers on the question sheet for next lesson (THURSDAY) You will find it on the shared area Wdrive-RE-SM- Philosophy-homework
  • 2. The Ontological Argument: An Introduction Learning Outcomes: ALL will be able to explain the Ontological argument. MOST will be able to analyse the strengths and weakness of the ontological argument SOME will be able to explain the significance of the ontological argument in the context of the other arguments for the existence of God January 19, 2015 Starter Task: What is greater?
  • 3. A priori or a posteriori knowledge?  This triangle has 3 sides. (a priori)  The nearest station to Latimer is Kettering station. (a posteriori)  The sun will rise tomorrow. (a posteriori)  The apple I am going to eat for lunch is a fruit. (a priori)  Jesus was the son of God. (a posteriori) Learning Outcomes:  ALL will be able to explain the Ontological argument.  MOST will be able to analyse the strengths and weakness of the ontological argument  SOME will be able to explain the significance of the ontological argument in the context of the other arguments for the existence of God
  • 4. A priori – a proposition based on a definition and the use of logic alone, no experience needed. A posteriori – a proposition based upon experience alone.  Learning Outcomes:  ALL will be able to explain the Ontological argument.  MOST will be able to analyse the strengths and weakness of the ontological argument  SOME will be able to explain the significance of the ontological argument in the context of the other arguments for the existence of God
  • 5. A definition of God  Take a couple of minutes to think of a definition of God.  Make a list of the attributes of the attributes of God.  Learning Outcomes:  ALL will be able to explain the Ontological argument.  MOST will be able to analyse the strengths and weakness of the ontological argument  SOME will be able to explain the significance of the ontological argument in the context of the other arguments for the existence of God
  • 7. Anselm says  God is “that than which nothing greater can be conceived”  “you can’t imagine anything greater than God”  “God is perfect in every way”
  • 8. Anselm Says:  If God is perfect in every way he must exist in reality  If he existed only in the mind we could imagine a more perfect God – one that existed in the mind and in reality God God +
  • 9. Ontological Argument in a nutshell - Something is greater if it exists than if it doesn’t. - If God is the greatest thing imaginable, he must exist. For if he didn’t, you could imagine something greater – something with all his qualities, but which did actually exist. Learning Outcomes:  ALL will be able to explain the Ontological argument.  MOST will be able to analyse the strengths and weakness of the ontological argument  SOME will be able to explain the significance of the ontological argument in the context of the other arguments for the existence of God
  • 10. Inductive and deductive arguments  All the other arguments for the existence of God are inductive – they can at best only give a highly probable conclusion.  Inductive arguments are based upon a posteriori knowledge – knowledge derived from (after) experience. Argument Experience Teleological Cosmological Moral  Learning Outcomes:  ALL will be able to explain the Ontological argument.  MOST will be able to analyse the strengths and weakness of the ontological argument  SOME will be able to explain the significance of the ontological argument in the context of the other arguments for the existence of God
  • 11. Inductive/deductive cont’d…  A deductive argument is based upon a priori knowledge.  The conclusion is implied directly by the premises, i.e. flows directly from them.  If the premises are true and the structure is valid, then the conclusion must be true.  The Ontological Argument is the only deductive argument for the existence of God. → This means ontological arguments are the only arguments that could… prove God’s existence conclusively
  • 12. Task  You will watch these clips and use the question sheet to help you learn about the ontological arguments and the arguments against it.  You will have 45 mins to complete this.  Part 1  Part 2  When you finish you need to attempt this 10 mark question: ‘‘The ontological argument is convincing’ DiscusThe ontological argument is convincing’ Discus
  • 13. The Ontological Argument Ontological. (From the Greek ontos, meaning being.) Lesson objectives: •DESCRIBE the ontological argument (Grade E & D) •EXPLAIN the strengths and weaknesses of the ontological argument (Grade C) •EVALUATE the ontological argument and express your own view of it. (Grade B & A) January 19, 2015
  • 14. Anselm’s argument Anselm says that the definition, or essence, of God includes existence: God is a perfect being, i.e. one than which none greater can be conceived. HOW DOES THIS WORK? Lets say… 1. God exists in the understanding, but not in reality. 2. However, one can conceive of a being that not only exists in the understanding, but also in reality itself. 3. A being that exists both in the understanding and in reality is greater than a being that exists solely in the understanding. 4. Hence, one can conceive of a being greater than God. Contradiction – reject premise 1. But the problem here is that, even if one shows that ‘God exists’ is an analytic truth, all one has done is say that existence is a necessary property of the concept ‘God’.
  • 15. What is an analytic statement? SO if you said, “cold, white snow”, or “a duffle coat with toggles on it” you wouldn’t be wrong, but you wouldn’t be saying anything we couldn’t already have worked out if we knew the definition of the word. An analytic statement tells us nothing about the world, is just a definition… AND we wouldn’t know whether any duffle coats or snow actually exist. If a crazy, duffle-coat-hating person destroyed all the duffle coats in the world, would duffle coats still have toggles on?
  • 16. Remember Plato? Plato used the idea that each thing has an essence without which it wouldn’t be what it is. Can you remember what Plato called the essence, or paradigm, of things that actually exist in the world? And how we can know about them? But does it make sense to say that things have some kind of existence (somewhere, if not in the visible realm) just because we can conceive of them? (Anselm had described God as perfect goodness which causes goodness in everything he creates. Sound familiar?)
  • 17. Spot the difference… Can you tell that one of these dogs actually exists and one doesn’t just from the ideas of the dogs?
  • 18. Gaunilo thought not He said 1: we can’t conceive of perfection – we have no experience of such a thing, and 2: just because you can conceive of something (he used the example of an island), doesn’t make it exist. If the fact that you think you can conceive of an existing island makes it exist, your argument must be flawed. Discussion Question 1: What would Plato have said about this? Discussion Question 2: What do you think? Can you conceive of something you have no experience of? Infinity and eternity? Discussion Question 3: Is this true? If you say you are conceiving of an island that exists, you’d know really that it didn’t. You wouldn’t really being conceiving of an existing island, you’d know you were kidding yourself.
  • 19. Descartes had his own version of the ontological argument Descartes has an idea of God as being one, perfect being. Plato thought that we gain knowledge of concepts by recollecting the time when we resided in the realm of Forms. Descartes thought that we must have got our knowledge of perfection from God, because we can have no experience of perfection in this life. Unlike Plato he doesn’t believe in a cycle of rebirth, but he does believe that God has imprinted some knowledge on us so that we know certain things whatever experience we have had in the world. Descartes says that we get our knowledge of God from God, who has left his imprint on our souls like the trademark a craftsman leaves on his work. Question: Is this feasible? Do you think we have any innate knowledge? What?
  • 20. Some background  Descartes’ ontological argument featured in his book Meditations  His aim of this book was to doubt everything that he could possibly… to see what it was he that he could not doubt (methodological scepticism) His answer; the one thing he could not doubt was …. That he existed
  • 22. 3 minute philosophy Good break down of Rene’s philosophy Next he enquired into the existence of God to see if he could be a deceiver. → He realised that he had within him a clear and distinct idea of a Perfect God, which did not and could not originate in him as a corporeal (physical, finite) substance. God must exist as the cause of this idea.
  • 23. I think… Both Anselm’s and Descartes’ starting point was that God exists. What do you think? Task: Write Anselm’s argument for the existence of God in bullet points. Make this the centre of a mind map. Add on Gaunilo’s criticisms and Kant’s criticism. Then add on your views. Use your text books to make additional notes on the arguments

Editor's Notes

  • #6: Would your God have to exist as part of it’s definition?