PHIL1003 Lecture Notes - Lecture 6: Color Blindness, Ontological Argument
Challenging the Ontological Argument
• Challenge 1: Assessing Gaunilos Refutation by Logical Analogy
o We know such an island doesnt exist, hence there appears to be a
problem with the original argument. Is it properly analogous?
o It seems that the move from premises to conclusion in parody argument is
logically analogous to the Ontological Argument
o But a disanalogy may lurk within the premises themselves: Rowe points
out two such disanalogies
o St. Anselms argument only works if applied to things of unsurpassed
greatness
o )ts not clear that the concept of greatest conceivable island is meaningful
– and hence, whether it denotes something that is possible. Premise 3 of
the Island analogy argument may thus be dodgy
o Think of greatest conceivable basketball player or greatest conceivable
movie – these things are subjective.
▪ The greatest conceivable being adheres to a strict set of attributes
▪ A promising point in which Anselm can resist the analogy
o )f either of these two disanalogies hold, then Gaunilos refutation by
logical analogy doesnt work.
• Challenge 2: Is the concept of God coherent?
o One might claim it is impossible for something like God to exist in reality,
like a round square. Something with the attributes of God cannot possibly
exist
o This directly challenges premise 3 (also purports to reduce the disanalogy
between greatest conceivable island and greatest conceivable being, thus
impacting on previous argument)
o Is the concept of God more like the greatest possible angle (upward of
60˚ or like the greatest possible integer (infinite)
o Can we talk about Gods qualities converging upon a limit, or are they
infinite? E.g. is Gods moral goodness infinite or finite? Does this also apply
to us? Are we infinitely good or evil?
▪ Are these attributes qualitative or quantitative?
o Do the qualities of God cohere with each other or within themselves?
• Challenge 3: Is existence a property?
o When St. Anselm claims that existence is a perfection, he is inadvertently
treating existence as if it were a quality or property that a thing can have
o Kant argues that existence is not a property something can have
o Premise : Existence in reality is better than existence in the
understanding alone
▪ P1: if P2 is true, then existence is a great-making property
▪ P2: If existence is a great-making property, then existence is a
property
▪ P: Existence is not a property Kants argument
▪ C1: So, existence is not a great-making property
▪ C2: Therefore, P2 is false.
o Kants argument for P – Existence is not a property has been given
several interpretations
▪ A list of intrinsic properties of an apple
find more resources at oneclass.com
find more resources at oneclass.com
