Homework

Listen to and read the Russell & Copleston Debate.

Fill in the answers on the question sheet for next lesson (THURSDAY)

You will find it on the shared area Wdrive-RE-SM-Philosophy-homework

The Ontological Argument: An Introduction

Learning Outcomes: ALL will be able to explain the Ontological argument.MOST will be able to analyse the strengths and weakness of the ontological argumentSOME will be able to explain the significance of the ontological argument in the context of the other arguments for the existence of God

January 19, 2015Starter Task:What is greater?

A priori or a posteriori knowledge? This triangle has 3 sides.(a priori) The nearest station to Latimer is Kettering

station.(a posteriori) The sun will rise tomorrow.(a posteriori) The apple I am going to eat for lunch is a fruit.(a priori) Jesus was the son of God.(a posteriori) Learning Outcomes:

ALL will be able to explain the Ontological argument. MOST will be able to analyse the strengths and

weakness of the ontological argument SOME will be able to explain the significance of the

ontological argument in the context of the other arguments for the existence of God

A priori – a proposition based on a definition and the use of logic alone, no experience needed.

A posteriori – a proposition based upon experience alone.

Learning Outcomes: ALL will be able to explain the Ontological argument. MOST will be able to analyse the strengths and

weakness of the ontological argument SOME will be able to explain the significance of the

ontological argument in the context of the other arguments for the existence of God

A definition of God

Take a couple of minutes to think of a definition of God.

Make a list of the attributes of the attributes of God.

Learning Outcomes: ALL will be able to explain the Ontological argument. MOST will be able to analyse the strengths and

weakness of the ontological argument SOME will be able to explain the significance of the

ontological argument in the context of the other arguments for the existence of God

Perfection = ?

Anselm says

God is “that than which nothing greater can be conceived”

“you can’t imagine anything greater than God”

“God is perfect in every way”

Anselm Says:

If God is perfect in every way he must exist in reality

If he existed only in the mind we could imagine a more perfect God – one that existed in the mind and in reality

GodGod+

Ontological Argument in a nutshell- Something is greater if it exists

than if it doesn’t.

- If God is the greatest thing imaginable, he must exist. For if he didn’t, you could imagine something greater – something with all his qualities, but which did actually exist. Learning Outcomes:

ALL will be able to explain the Ontological argument. MOST will be able to analyse the strengths and

weakness of the ontological argument SOME will be able to explain the significance of the

ontological argument in the context of the other arguments for the existence of God

Inductive and deductive arguments

All the other arguments for the existence of God are inductive – they can at best only give a highly probable conclusion.

Inductive arguments are based upon a posteriori knowledge

– knowledge derived from (after) experience.

Argument Experience

Teleological

Cosmological

Moral

Learning Outcomes: ALL will be able to explain the Ontological argument. MOST will be able to analyse the strengths and

weakness of the ontological argument SOME will be able to explain the significance of the

ontological argument in the context of the other arguments for the existence of God

Inductive/deductive cont’d…

A deductive argument is based upon a priori knowledge. The conclusion is implied directly by the premises, i.e. flows

directly from them. If the premises are true and the structure is valid, then the

conclusion must be true.

The Ontological Argument is the only deductive argument for the existence of God.

→ This means ontological arguments are the only arguments that could…

prove God’s existence conclusively

Task You will watch these clips and use the question

sheet to help you learn about the ontological arguments and the arguments against it.

You will have 45 mins to complete this. Part 1 Part 2

When you finish you need to attempt this 10 mark question:

‘‘The ontological argument is convincing’ DiscusThe ontological argument is convincing’ Discus

The Ontological ArgumentOntological. (From the Greek ontos, meaning being.)

Lesson objectives:•DESCRIBE the ontological argument (Grade E & D)

•EXPLAIN the strengths and weaknesses of the ontological argument (Grade C)

•EVALUATE the ontological argument and express your own view of it. (Grade B & A)

January 19, 2015

Anselm’s argument

Anselm says that the definition, or essence, of God includes existence: God is a perfect being, i.e. one than which none greater can be conceived.

HOW DOES THIS WORK? Lets say…

1. God exists in the understanding, but not in reality. 2. However, one can conceive of a being that not only exists in the understanding, but also in reality itself.3. A being that exists both in the understanding and in reality is greater than a being that exists solely in the understanding.4. Hence, one can conceive of a being greater than God.Contradiction – reject premise 1.

But the problem here is that, even if one shows that ‘God exists’ is an analytic truth, all one has done is say that existence is a necessary property of the concept ‘God’.

What is an analytic statement?

SO if you said, “cold, white snow”, or “a duffle coat with toggles on it” you wouldn’t be wrong, but you wouldn’t be saying anything we couldn’t already have worked out if we knew the definition of the word.

An analytic statement tells us nothing about the world, is just a definition…

AND we wouldn’t know whether any duffle coats or snow actually exist. If a crazy, duffle-coat-hating person destroyed all the duffle coats in the world, would duffle coats still have toggles on?

Remember Plato?

Plato used the idea that each thing has an essence without which it wouldn’t be what it is. Can you remember what Plato called the essence, or paradigm, of things that actually exist in the world? And how we can know about them?

But does it make sense to say that things have some kind of existence (somewhere, if not in the visible realm) just because we can conceive of them?

(Anselm had described God as perfect goodness which causes goodness in everything he creates. Sound familiar?)

Spot the difference…

Can you tell that one of these dogs actually exists and one doesn’t just from the ideas of the dogs?

Gaunilo thought notHe said

1: we can’t conceive of perfection – we have no experience of such a thing,

and

2: just because you can conceive of something (he used the example of an island), doesn’t make it exist. If the fact that you think you can conceive of an existing island makes it exist, your argument must be flawed.

Discussion Question 1:

What would Plato have said about this?

Discussion Question 2:

What do you think? Can you conceive of something you have no experience of? Infinity and eternity?

Discussion Question 3:

Is this true? If you say you are conceiving of an island that exists, you’d know really that it didn’t. You wouldn’t really being conceiving of an existing island, you’d know you were kidding yourself.

Descartes had his own version of the ontological argument

Descartes has an idea of God as being one, perfect being.

Plato thought that we gain knowledge of concepts by recollecting the time when we resided in the realm of Forms. Descartes thought that we must have got our knowledge of perfection from God, because we can have no experience of perfection in this life. Unlike Plato he doesn’t believe in a cycle of rebirth, but he does believe that God has imprinted some knowledge on us so that we know certain things whatever experience we have had in the world. Descartes says that we get our knowledge of God from God, who has left his imprint on our souls like the trademark a craftsman leaves on his work.

Question: Is this feasible? Do you think we have any innate knowledge? What?

Some background Descartes’ ontological argument featured in his

book Meditations His aim of this book was to doubt everything

that he could possibly… to see what it was he that he could not doubt (methodological scepticism)

His answer; the one thing he could not doubt was ….

That he existed

“I think, therefore I am”

3 minute philosophy

Good break down of Rene’s philosophy

Next he enquired into the existence of God to see if he could be a deceiver.

→ He realised that he had within him a clear and distinct idea of a Perfect God, which did not and could not originate in him as a corporeal (physical, finite) substance.

God must exist as the cause of this idea.

I think…Both Anselm’s and Descartes’ starting point was that God exists.

What do you think?Task: Write Anselm’s argument for the existence of God in bullet points. Make this the centre of a mind map. Add on Gaunilo’s criticisms and Kant’s criticism. Then add on your views.Use your text books to make additional notes on the arguments