What type of argument is the ontological argument?

Asked By: Tatevik Kaldybaev | Last Updated: 20th January, 2020
Category: religion and spirituality atheism
4.2/5 (254 Views . 29 Votes)
An ontological argument is a philosophical argument for the existence of God that uses ontology. Many arguments fall under the category of the ontological, and they tend to involve arguments about the state of being or existing.

Click to see full answer

Correspondingly, what kind of argument is Anselm's ontological argument?

Ontological argument, Argument that proceeds from the idea of God to the reality of God. It was first clearly formulated by St. Anselm in his Proslogion (1077–78); a later famous version is given by René Descartes. Anselm began with the concept of God as that than which nothing greater can be conceived.

Also Know, why is the ontological argument considered an a priori argument? Anselm's ontological argument alleges that “God exists” is a statement that, if we are thinking clearly and understand the definition of “God,” we can know to be true a priori. Compare Anselm's argument to Paley's design argument for God's existence.

Likewise, people ask, what are the premises of the ontological argument?

Ontological arguments are arguments, for the conclusion that God exists, from premises which are supposed to derive from some source other than observation of the world—e.g., from reason alone.

What are the 5 arguments for the existence of God?

They are:

  • the argument from "first mover";
  • the argument from causation;
  • the argument from contingency;
  • the argument from degree;
  • the argument from final cause or ends ("teleological argument").

36 Related Question Answers Found

Does the ontological argument succeed?

The argument entails that any conclusive ontological arguments would contradict the very nature of God. In short, it leads to the conclusion that no ontological argument can be successful. It should be noted that the above argument has the general form of a reductio ad absurdum.

How does Anselm define God?

Anselm defined God as "a being than which no greater can be conceived", and argued that this being must exist in the mind, even in the mind of the person who denies the existence of God.

What is the ontological argument for God?

As an “a priori” argument, the Ontological Argument tries to “prove” the existence of God by establishing the necessity of God's existence through an explanation of the concept of existence or necessary being . Anselm, Archbishop of Canterbury first set forth the Ontological Argument in the eleventh century.

What is the ontological argument simple?

The ontological argument is an idea in religious philosophy. It is supposed to show that God exists. There are different versions, but they all argue something like: because we can imagine a perfect being, there must be a god. The idea is that existing makes a good thing better than one that's only imaginary.

What is the design argument for God's existence?

The teleological or physico-theological argument, also known as the argument from design, or intelligent design argument is an argument for the existence of God or, more generally, for an intelligent creator based on perceived evidence of deliberate design in the natural world.

Does the ontological argument beg the question?

When a premise in an argument, or a main conjunct of a premise, is identical to the conclusion, the argument begs the question in itself in a logical way. When an argument is such that its premises cannot be known independently of its conclusion, the argument begs the question in itself in an epistemological way.

What is the point of Pascal's wager?

Pascal's wager is an argument in philosophy presented by the seventeenth-century French philosopher, mathematician and physicist, Blaise Pascal (1623–1662). It posits that humans bet with their lives that God either exists or does not.

What is the argument from contingency?

The “Argument from Contingency” examines how every being must be either necessary or contingent. Since not every being can be contingent, it follow that there must be a necessary being upon which all things depend. This being is God.

What does it mean to be ontological?

Ontology is the philosophical study of being. More broadly, it studies concepts that directly relate to being, in particular becoming, existence, reality, as well as the basic categories of being and their relations.

What is a necessary being?

logical necessity: a logically necessary being is a being whose non-existence is a logical impossibility, and which therefore exists either timeless or eternally in all possible worlds.

Did Descartes believe in free will?

Freedom is a central theme in Descartes's philosophy, where it is linked to the theme of the infinite: it is through the freedom of the will, experienced as unlimited, that the human understands itself to bear the "image and likeness" of the infinite God.

What was Gaunilo's argument?

In his work In Behalf of the Fool, Gaunilo contends that St Anselm's ontological argument fails because logic of the same kind would force one to conclude many things exist which certainly do not. An empiricist, Gaunilo thought that the human intellect is only able to comprehend information provided by the senses.

What did Thomas Aquinas argue?

Aquinas argues that if everything can not-be, then at one time there was nothing in existence. If at one time nothing was in existence, it would have been impossible for anything to have begun to exist; and thus even now nothing would be in existence – which is absurd.

What is the problem of evil in philosophy?

Problem of evil. The problem of evil is the question of how to reconcile the existence of evil and suffering with an omnipotent, omnibenevolent, and omniscient God (see theism). Or as the first known presentation by the Greek philosopher Epicurus puts it: "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?

Why is the ontological argument deductive?

Descartes' arguments for the existence of God are Ontological Arguments: they are deductive and a priori proofs for the existence of God. They aim to be the sort of argument such that if the premises are true, then the conclusion must be true.

What is the difference between ontological and cosmological arguments?

Although in the ontological argument the perfect being is determined to exist through its own concept, in fact nothing can be determined to exist in this manner; one has to begin with existence. In short, the cosmological argument presupposes the cogency of the ontological argument.

Can existence be treated as a predicate?

Premise 3 thus entails that (1) existence is a property; and (2) instantiating existence makes a thing better, other things being equal, than it would have been otherwise. Kant rejects premise 3 on the ground that, as a purely formal matter, existence does not function as a predicate.