Beah Davee Marie Somozo

2014-35733

BS-Biochemistry

May 16, 2015

Existence or a Mere Folly?

A Philosophical Reflection on the Ontological Argument
Based on the Question: Among the topics that we have discussed in class, develop an essay
explaining that philosophy. State the major assumptions and conclusions of the said philosophy.
A question that has been debated upon since the beginning of man. A topic even more
controversial than what you ate at breakfast today. A topic that affects generations upon
generations of people spanning different countries, races & ages. A topic that affects us all. The
topic of Gods existence.
There are many arguments that support his existence. And just as many that criticizes said
arguments. And still some that supports his non-existence or, at least, his lack of omnipotence
and omniscience. One argument that supports his existence is the Ontological Argument.
The Ontological Arguments basic premise is just that they attempt to show that we can
deduce Gods existence from the very definition of God. In laymans term, we attempt to prove
God exists by using what we believe He is. There are many proponents to this philosophy. Each
with their own theories and no small amount of criticisms.
One of the first and best- known arguments was the argument brought forward by St.
Anselm, Archbishop of Cantebury. He argued following this logic:
In his Proslogion, St. Anselm claims to derive the existence of God from the
concept of a being than which no greater can be conceived. St. Anselm reasoned that, if
such a being fails to exist, then a greater beingnamely, a being than which no greater
can be conceived, and which existscan be conceived. But this would be absurd: nothing
can be greater than a being than which no greater can be conceived. So a being than
which no greater can be conceivedi.e., Godexists (Ontological Arguments, 2015).
Another argument is one brought by the world-renowned Mathematician Ren Descartes.
He argued that the concept of God is that of a supremely perfect being, holding all perfections.
And it would be contradictory if said supremely perfect being would not exist since his nonexistence would connote that the being is not perfect. So it would follow that said supremely
perfect being exists. So God exists. Gottfried Leibniz attempted to fill what he took to be a
shortcoming in Descartes' view. He said that Descartes argument would fail unless the idea of a
supremely perfect being is coherent, or that there is a probability for a supremely perfect being to

exist. He argues that since we cannot analyze perfections, it is impossible to demonstrate that
perfections are incompatibleand he concluded from this that all perfections can co-exist
together in a single entity (Ontological Arguments, 2015).
Kurt Gdel's Ontological Argument is an example of a modal argument, arguments with
premises which concern modal claims about God, i.e., claims about the possibility or necessity of
God's attributes and existence (Ontological Arguments, 2015). Gdel's Ontological Argument is
explained below.
Definition 1: x is God-like if and only if x has as essential properties those and
only those properties which are positive
Definition 2: A is an essence of x if and only if for every property B, x has B
necessarily if and only if A entails B
Definition 3: x necessarily exists if and only if every essence of x is necessarily
exemplified
Axiom 1: If a property is positive, then its negation is not positive.
Axiom 2: Any property entailed byi.e., strictly implied bya positive property is
positive
Axiom 3: The property of being God-like is positive
Axiom 4: If a property is positive, then it is necessarily positive
Axiom 5: Necessary existence is positive
Axiom 6: For any property P, if P is positive, then being necessarily P is positive.
Theorem 1: If a property is positive, then it is consistent, i.e., possibly
exemplified.
Corollary 1: The property of being God-like is consistent.
Theorem 2: If something is God-like, then the property of being God-like is an
essence of that thing.
Theorem 3: Necessarily, the property of being God-like is exemplified
(Ontological Arguments, 2015).
But every idea has its own share of critics, more often than not, their own
contemporaries. Like Gaunilo of Marmoutiers who is so against St. Anselms argument. He
argued that that if the ontological argument for the existence of God is sound, then its logic can
be used to prove the existence of any perfect thing, e.g. the perfect island. However it would be

illogical if every perfect thing exists making the argument flawed (Gaunilo of Marmoutiers,
n.d.).
Another is St Thomas Aquinas, the thirteenth century Dominican and the arguably
greatest philosopher of religion of all (The Ontological Argument, n.d.). He argues that Gods
existence is not obvious to us, rejecting Anselms ontological argument. Gods existence,
therefore, requires demonstration (St Thomas Aquinas, n.d.). He argues that not everyone who
hears the word God has the same concept of God. And even if they had the same concept, "it
does not therefore follow that he understands what the word signifies exists actually, but only
that it exists mentally." (Himma, n.d.).
However, the criticisms of Immanuel Kant are the most publicized. He argued against the
ontological argument on the grounds that existence is not a property of objects but concepts, and
that whatever ideas may participate in a given concept it is a further question whether that
concept is instantiated. Whether his criticisms are sufficient to undermine all forms of the
ontological argument remains a matter of much dispute (The Ontological Argument, n.d.).
Overall, there is really no way of proving whether God exists or not. One can spend his
lifetime trying to solve this problem and all he will find are never-ending questions. I believe
what matters most is to live life to fullest as a good citizen and a good man. And if God does
exist and there is an afterlife, well, at least youve got your answer and youre in heaven. If not,
at least one can proudly say that you have achieved happiness or contentment in your lifetime.

REFERENCES
Gaunilo of Marmoutiers. (n.d.). Retrieved May 16, 2015, from Philosophy of Religion Web site:
http://www.philosophyofreligion.info/whos-who/historic-figures/gaunilo-of-marmoutiers/
Himma, K. E. (n.d.). Anselm: Ontological Argument for God's Existence. Retrieved May 16, 2015, from Internet
Encyclopedia of Philosophy Web site: http://www.iep.utm.edu/ont-arg/#SH2c
Ontological Arguments. (2015, February 3). Retrieved May 16, 2015, from Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
Web site: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ontological-arguments/

St

Thomas Aquinas.

(n.d.).

Retrieved

May

16,

2015,

from

Philosophy

of

Religion

Web

site:

http://www.philosophyofreligion.info/whos-who/historic-figures/st-thomas-aquinas/
The Ontological Argument. (n.d.). Retrieved May 16, 2015, from Philosophy of Religion Web site:
http://www.philosophyofreligion.info/theistic-proofs/the-ontological-argument/