Ontological Argument

The ontological argument from Anselm and Descartes, and challenges to it from Gaunilo and Kant

For medieval theologians, the existence of God was a "given" - there was no need to debate it. As the philosophy of Aristotle, and his Muslim commentators, was introduced into the universities, it was seen as a threat to traditional Christian belief. A debate raged between the supporters of the new philosophy and the "orthodox" traditionalists. Anselm wanted to reconcile the two approaches.

The Monologion

Anselm wrote "The Monologion" as a meditation on the Divine Being. In it he stated that he wanted to find a single argument which would show that God exists. His argument came to him after a long period of contemplation - it is said that he was sat in Vespers when the idea hit him.

He explains his Argument in "The Proslogion". He bases his argument on a quotation from Psalm 14:1. Anselm argues that it is possible for anyone to conceive of "that than which nothing greater can be thought"

Therefore, Lord, you who give knowledge of the faith, give me as much knowledge as you know to be fitting for me, because you are as we believe and that which we believe. And indeed we believe you are something greater than which cannot be thought. Or is there no such kind of thing, for "the fool said in his heart, 'there is no God'" (Ps. 13:1, 52:1)? But certainly that same fool, having heard what I just said, "something greater than which cannot be thought,"understands what he heard, and what he understands is in his thought, even if he does not think it exists. For it is one thing for something to exist in a person's thought and quite another for the person to think that thing exists. For when a painter thinks ahead to what he will paint, he has that picture in his thought, but he does not yet think it exists, because he has not done it yet. Once he has painted it he has it in his thought and thinks it exists because he has done it.

Thus even the fool is compelled to grant that something greater than which cannot be thought exists in thought, because he understands what he hears, and whatever is understood exists in thought. And certainly that greater than which cannot be understood cannot exist only in thought, for if it exists only in thought it could also be thought of as existing in reality as well, which is greater. If, therefore, that than which greater cannot be thought exists in thought alone, then that than which greater cannot be thought turns out to be that than which something greater actually can be thought, but that is obviously impossible.

Therefore something than which greater cannot be thought undoubtedly exists both in thought and in reality.

Source: www.fordham/edu/halsall/source/anselm.html

What does this mean?

1. This "something greater than which cannot be thought" must exist, at least in the mind.

2. But if it exists only in the mind then it is inferior to anything that exists both in the mind and in reality.

3. It must therefore be that the thing than which nothing greater can be thought exists both in the mind and in reality.

4. The most perfect conceivable being must exist in reality as well as in the mind.

This argument hinges on the following points:

• The real will always be greater than the imaginary (compare this debate with Ally McBeal's struggle with her feelings about the perfect "meaningful other"!)
• That God is the "greater thing" that Anselm is talking of.
• This leads to the second stage of Anselm's argument, that if God is the greatest thing imaginable, he must exist - if he didn't, something greater could be imagined which actually did exist!

In the third chapter of the Proslogion, he argues that for God, existence is necessary.

In fact, it so undoubtedly exists that it cannot be thought of as not existing. For one can think there exists something that cannot be thought of as not existing, and that would be greater than something which can be thought of as not existing. For if that greater than which cannot be thought can be thought of as not existing, then that greater than which cannot be thought is not that greater than which cannot be thought, which does not make sense. Thus that than which nothing can be thought so undoubtedly exists that it cannot even be thought of as not existing.

And you, Lord God, are this being. You exist so undoubtedly, my Lord God, that you cannot even be thought of as not existing. And deservedly, for if some mind could think of something greater than you, that creature would rise above the creator and could pass judgment on the creator, which is absurd. And indeed whatever exists except you alone can be thought of as not existing. You alone of all things most truly exists and thus enjoy existence to the fullest degree of all things, because nothing else exists so undoubtedly, and thus everything else enjoys being in a lesser degree. Why therefore did the fool say in his heart "there is no God," since it is so evident to any rational mind that you above all things exist?

Why indeed, except precisely because he is stupid and foolish?

Source: www.fordham/edu/halsall/source/anselm.html

Anselm aims to define God in such a way as to make it impossible to conceive of Him as not existing.

• What we cannot conceive of as not existing must be greater than what we can conceive of as not existing.
• It would be absurd to propose that the greatest thing that can be thought of did not exist, because there would be something greater in reality than the thought first proposed.

"Since God in his infinite perfection is not limited in or by time, the twin possibilities of his having ever some to exist and of his ever ceasing to exist are alike excluded, and his non-existence is rendered impossible".  - Hick, J. Philosophy of Religion, Prentice Hall, p17

Assuming you can accept Anselm’s definition of God as “the greatest thing that can be thought” If we can hold the concept of God in our minds, God must exist in reality, since that which exists in reality is always greater that that which exists only in the mind.

Criticisms of Anselm's Argument

A monk named Gaunilo argued that, if what Anselm said was true, then the same could be said to prove the existence of an imaginary island. His reply was called "In Behalf of the Fool".

• You think of the perfect island.
• Since it is perfect, it must exist, or it would be inferior to the grottiest island on the map.

Anselm himself provided a reply.

• He pointed out that an island is a finite, limited thing.
• When one person imagines a "perfect" island, there will always be other "perfect" islands.

The "thought than which nothing greater can be thought" is unique. Anselm believed that Gaunilo's argument was defeated by his own

proposition of "necessary existence".

Necessary Existence

In “Teach Yourself Philosophy of Religion”, Mel Thompson points out that there is a distinction between logical and factual necessity.

• If "God exists" is a logical necessity (i.e. if it is an analytic statement, [true within itself] then "God does not exist" would be self-contradictory.
• If "God exists" is a factual necessity, it implies that it is impossible for things to be as they are if God did not exist, and therefore that it is actually not possible for there to be no God.
• Source: Thompson, M. Teach Yourself Philosophy of Religion, Hodder, p92

The philosopher holds the idea of a “Greatest Being” in his mind. Simply knowing about this “Greatest Being” does not mean that it has to exist. All that has been established is that if I can think of such a being, then it is possible for it to exist. Anselm goes on to try to argue that it is necessary for God to exist.

Furthermore, if it can be thought of at all, it must necessarily exist. For no one who denies or doubts the existence of "a being greater than which cannot be thought of" denies or doubts that, if it did exist, it would be impossible for it not to exist either in reality or in the mind. Otherwise it would not be "a being greater than which cannot be thought of." But whatever can be thought of yet does not actually exist, could, if it did come to exist, not existence again in reality and in the mind. That is why, if it can even be thought of, "a being greater than which cannot be thought of" cannot be nonexistent.

Source: www.fordham/edu/halsall/source/anselm.htm

• In order for the concept held in the philosopher’s mind to be “the greatest being”, it has to be the greatest thing in reality.
• If the philosopher had thought of this greatest being, and it did not exist, then (following the first part of Anselm’s argument) it would have to come into existence.
• If it can come into existence, it can also go out of existence – it is a part of the contingent world, and not the greatest thing that can be thought of.

If this “greatest being” that you have been thinking of is actually the greatest being, it must exist. The Greatest Thing must be so perfect that it cannot be conceived of as not existing.

God’s Existence is therefore Necessary

But let us suppose that it does not exist (if it is even possible to suppose as much). Whatever can be thought of yet does not exist, even if it should come into existence, would not be "a being greater than which cannot be thought of." Thus "a being greater than which cannot be thought of" would not be "a being greater than which cannot be thought of," which is absurd. Thus if "a being greater than which cannot be thought of" can even be thought of, it is false to say that it does not exist; and it is even more false if such can be understood and exist in the understanding.

Source: www.fordham/edu/halsall/source/anselm.htm

But…

You cannot use this argument to prove that anything exists. Perfection does not extend into the contingent world. Anselm covered this in his discussion of Gaunilo’s objection to the first part of his argument.

So:

1. God is the thought than which nothing greater can be thought.

2. God is not a part of the contingent world.

3. God is absolute perfection.

4. God necessarily exists.

Norman Malcolm (1911 – 1990) also suggested a way to understand the concept of necessary existence. It may help you to understand the concept of necessary existence if you read his argument!