AB
25/11/2014 07:07:25 pm
The lesson has started ... what needs to be in an introduction on OA?
Reply
TJ
25/11/2014 07:16:27 pm
The ontological argument is an a priori argument that was written in the 10th century by a man named Anselm. Anselm uses logic to form his argument and reach a conclusion, hence making it deductive.
Reply
MH
25/11/2014 07:16:05 pm
The ontological argument is an a prior argument proposed by St Anselm in the 10th century. The ontological argument is a deductive argument that is based on God being of necessary existence.
Reply
C&A
25/11/2014 07:16:30 pm
The Ontological argument is an an A Priori argument proposed by St. Anselm in the 11th century based on the existence of God. He developed his theory from referencing psalms
Reply
C&A
25/11/2014 07:30:19 pm
The ontological argument is a priori argument proposed by Anselm, in the 10th century. The argument is based on deduction that God is that which nothing greater that can be conceived. He built his argument by the reference in Psalms: "The fool has said in his heart there is no God". The aim of the ontological argument was to prove the fool wrong.
Reply
EA
25/11/2014 07:17:34 pm
The ontological argument is an a priori argument proposed by Anselm in the 10th century as a prayer to God. The argument is based on the deduction that God is 'that than which nothing greater can be conceived and therefore exists.
Reply
M&E
25/11/2014 07:29:55 pm
The ontological argument is an a priori argument proposed by Anselm in the 10th century as a prayer to God. It is a deductive argument that is based on God being of necessary existence. He developed his theory from referencing psalms "Only the fool has said in his heart, there is no God". He believed the fool to be a non-believer but wasn't attempting to prove him wrong.
Reply
TJ
25/11/2014 07:32:57 pm
Anselm proposed the ontological argument during the 10th century. The ontological argument is a deductive argument that is based on God being of necessary existence. The ontological argument is the only argument that is based on existence.
Reply
AB
25/11/2014 07:35:10 pm
How do we start answering the actual essay?
Reply
TJ
25/11/2014 07:45:17 pm
Anselm's argument can be argued to be based on faith because the whole argument is based on the premise that God exists. The very fact that Anselm assumes that God exists reflects the period that he wrote the argument in: the 10th century when belief in God was the norm. This clearly supports that the argument was based on faith in order to understand and explain why God exists.
Reply
TJ
25/11/2014 07:51:45 pm
revised: Anselm's argument can be argued to be based on faith because the whole argument is based on the premise that God has necessary existence. The very fact that Anselm assumes that God exists reflects the period that he wrote the argument in: the 10th century when belief in God was the norm. However Kant objected to this by saying that existence is not a property that can be attributed to beings. the statement "God exists" still needs empirical evidence to be taken as true.
Reply
C&A
25/11/2014 07:47:38 pm
Originally the ontological argument was supposed to be presented as part of Anselm's proslogian. It was created in the 10th century, a significant era where the existence of God was presupposed. At this era there was no actual definition of God and so the argument did not give a reason for God to exist. Kant argued it was not enough to just define God, we cannot simply define something into existence. Hume believed that the lack of empirical evidence made the argument irrelevant for people who didn't believe in God.
Reply
M&E
25/11/2014 07:49:42 pm
The ontological argument tries to prove that God exists analytically rather than synthetically. For Anselm, God is 'that than which nothing greater can be conceived' and as it is 'greater to exist than not to exist, God must exist. For this to be logical however, David Hume argues that the argument doesn't offer any empirical evidence for the existence of God, as according to AJ Ayer, any statement that is not verifiable is meaningless, therefore the statement 'God exists' is not analytic, it is synthetic. This means that the argument is based solely on faith.
Reply
AB
25/11/2014 07:52:07 pm
How do we now state that it IS logical?
Reply
C&A
25/11/2014 08:04:08 pm
Descartes later contributed to the argument in the 16th century, the time of enlightenment. Descartes used analytical and logical statements such as the example of the triangle to prove that existence is a predicate of God. Norman Malcolm claimed that it is impossible to consider a necessary being not to exist. Platinga used a series of logical statements that develop the argument further with his theory of possible worlds - if God exists in one world he must exist in every world because he is maximally great and maximal greatness requires existence in every possible world.
Reply
TJ
25/11/2014 08:06:19 pm
However developments to the ontological argument have attempted to add reason to the argument. For example Platinga proposed that God was maximally great and maximally excellent and that it was possible to imagine our world with such a being. As a result if God is maximally great and excellent then he would exist in our world and other possible worlds. In contrast Brian Davies replies that such a being may be actual but it is not possible.
Reply
TJ
25/11/2014 08:09:30 pm
**that such a being may be possible but it is not actual.**
Reply
M&E
25/11/2014 08:08:30 pm
Anselm's 3rd premise is that of necessary existence. He stated that God cannot be a contingent being like the mere human as God is 'TTWNGCBC' and for God not to exist it would be a contradiction of his maximal greatness and maximal excellence as stated by Alvin Plantinga. For the universe and humans to exist it is logical to assume that there is a supreme being responsible for all existence, as supported by St Thomas Aquinas who also argued that God was of necessary existence, which therefore, provides logical evidence that the ontological argument is not just based on faith.
Reply
Mr Bull
25/11/2014 08:10:19 pm
How do you now express YOUR opinion? (remember evidence)
Reply
C&A
25/11/2014 08:15:49 pm
Overall, the argument is based on faith. Originally it was proposed as a prayer and you can only understand God if you have faith in him.
Reply
TJ
25/11/2014 08:21:57 pm
good conclusion guys (y)
Reply
TJ&ERF
25/11/2014 08:20:57 pm
In conclusion to some extent Anselm's argument could be seen to be based on faith because throughout the whole argument, God's existence is presupposed, which reflects Anselm's own belief in God. Furthermore the argument was originally meant to be a prayer which demonstrates Anselm practicing his faith at the time of developing this argument. However Ultimately Anselm's argument is based on reason because the argument is deductive. This was supported by Bertrand Russell, who is an atheist yet commented that the Ontological argument is logical.
Reply
M&E
25/11/2014 08:22:09 pm
Bertrand Russell lacked faith in the God of classical theism yet he was able to accept that to assume that God is the greatest being you can imagine is logical. Therefore, the ontological argument isn't a statement only of faith but also of reason.
Reply
Leave a Reply. |
This is for our A2 lessonsAny questions or thoughts? Archives
March 2015
Categories |