THE ONTOLOGICAL

ARGUMENT.
A BASIC INTRODUCTION.

THIS MUST BE USED AS A STARTING POINT : OTHER SHEETS, TEXT BOOK AND
INFORMATION WILL BE NEEDED TO HAVE THE FULL PICTURE .

NGf L CYMRU GCaD

 STARTING POINTS.
• Comes from Ontos : • A predicate / perfection /
Being. quality / characteristic /
• Is a priori : relies on attribute tells us
definition of a word. something about the
• Is therefore, deductive subject.
and analytic. • In the argument, Anselm
• The conclusion flows says that the predicate is
logically from the contained in the subject.
premises. • So, God’s existence can
(Does this make the be shown to be self-
conclusion right ?) evident by analysing the
word “God.”

NGf L CYMRU GCaD

 CONTINUED.
• By analysing the word • Anselm says :-
“God” it will be obvious, • “God exists” :
says Anselm, that God
• Subject=God
exists.
• Predicate=Exists.
• A bachelor is an
unmarried male : • 1. What do you think of
the above analysis of
• Subject=bachelor
“God exists ?”
• Predicate=male,
• 2. List 3 other a
unmarried.
priori/analytic statements
i.e. where the truth/falsity
is known by analysing the
statement.

NGf L CYMRU GCaD

DEFINITION OF GOD.
• As the argument
relies on analysing a
definition, clearly
the definition of God
is vital :-
• “A BEING THAN
WHICH NOTHING
GREATER CAN BE
CONCEIVED.”

NGf L CYMRU GCaD

 The Fool.
• Psalm 14 NIV
• 1 “The fool says in his heart,
"There is no God."
They are corrupt, their deeds are vile;
there is no one who does good.”
• Anselm says that even the fool has the
concept of God in their mind, in order to
reject God.

NGf L CYMRU GCaD

FROM GOD’S DEFINITION…
• Greater=perfect • So, to be “a Being
• Conceived=thought than..” God must
of have the perfection of
• Existence is a existence or else he
perfection you can would not be “a
have or lack Being..”
• Perfection=having all
perfections/predicates/ • WHY ?? Explain your
qualities etc. answer.

NGf L CYMRU GCaD

 THIS IS WHY FOLKS…
• It is surely better to exist in reality
than in mind alone.
• So, if God only had existence in the
mind, then there could be another being
who had existence in reality who would
then be greater/more perfect than God.
• But, this cannot be true, as God is “a
Being than..”
• So, God exists.
NGf L CYMRU GCaD
 GAUNILO
• He criticised this first form, mainly because
the first form has existence as a predicate.
• Anselm’s reply was that God is “a special
case” and the argument applies only to
necessary beings and not to contingent
things like islands.
• Anselm wrote a second form of the
ontological argument.

NGf L CYMRU GCaD

 ANSELM’S 2ND FORM.
• Here, existence is not treated as a predicate.
• Looks at 2 modes of existence : contingent
(could not have been) and necessary( could
not not be.)
• Basic form : greater/more perfect to have
necessary existence as opposed to contingent
existence. Why ?
• Contingent existence relies on another to
bring it into existence.

NGf L CYMRU GCaD

 2nd form (Cont.)
• This being is therefore limited. This being
cannot then be God as God is “a Being than..”
• If God were contingent/limited, then we could
conceive of another being who has the
predicate/property of necessary existence
and this being would then be greater/more
perfect than God, as it is more perfect to
have the perfection of necessary existence.
• So,… nearly there….!

NGf L CYMRU GCaD

 GOD EXISTS !!!
• God’s existence must be necessary in
order for God to match up to the definition
that Anselm has given him.
• So, by analysing the definition of the word
God, Anselm has shown that God exists.
• To deny God’s existence, once we have
that definition of God is contradictory.

NGf L CYMRU GCaD

 RESEARCH PIECE.
• Use at least two texts.
• Write an account of Anselm’s ontological
argument. You must separate out his two
forms.
• Using the WJEC Level descriptors, swop
your answer with someone else. Mark
each other’s work.

NGf L CYMRU GCaD