Assignment 2

Assignment 2

Answer No. 1

Ontological Argument

Ontological argument is rejected by various researchers, in this context, three objections to the ontological argument are found which is presented by Immanuel Kant which include existential statements are not analytical, existence is not a real predicate and the negative existential never not in conflict.

The first objection, Kant applies resolution analytical and synthetic courts to claim that God is, and he says that this claim must be synthetic: If we admit, as every sane person must correctly recognize that every existential argument is synthetic, how can we take that the predicate of existence cannot be denied without contradiction? Indeed, this characteristic is found only in analytic propositions, and this is precisely what constitutes their analytic nature. And as it is a synthetic court “there is no longer a contradiction in introducing the concept of existence the concept of things that we mean only in terms of its possibilities.” In simpler words, no existential statement cannot be analytic and synthetic, because no statement can be proven purely logically, and according to Kant is contradictory to say that existence is one of the attributes; therefore ontological proof is inherently impossible.

In addition to difficulties with the analytic and synthetic propositions in Kant's philosophy (which ultimately depends on the content of the concept of real predicate), there is evidence that there could be an existential statement analytical nature, and it is precisely the most perfect. Impossibility of such an existential statement, which would be analytically true, is in Kant presupposes rather than proved. Furthermore, the statement “God is” by its structure did not fit either the analytic statements, or between synthetic, just for their specificity (Saint, 1998).

Kant is known for his “slogan” that “existence is not a real predicate, ie the notion of something that could be added to the concept of things.” The latter objection rejects the (second) and one argument Descartes interpretation of ontological argument. Leibniz would agree with Kant's slogan, but not if we are talking about God.

Third Kant's claim that there are no negative existential statements is not contradictory. By planting there is only a “lengthy and vague way of confirming that no existential statement is required.” It would be parallel with the position of Hume, according to which “there is no such thing, which would imply a lack of contradiction”. If Kant's objection is directed against existing necessarily in terms of logical necessity, it is rather the criticisms leveled against second argument and even there not in the literal sense, as Anselm, as we have seen, speaks before the Aristotelian necessity and not logical. Attributing logical necessity God is rather difficult (although several arguments that support it). For this issue we will return in chapter on the concept of God.

The notion of necessity when speaking about God is also linked to major revival of interest in the ontological argument in the second half of the 19th century; when, in 1960, Norman Malcolm published an article which focuses on God must not exist because existence is ...