The Ontological Arguments of Anselm, Descartes, and Kant

There have been numerous ontological arguments concerning the existence of God, both in the Western and Eastern philosophical traditions. There have also been considerable criticisms of the ontological arguments that have been made concerning the same concept. In this essay, there will be an analysis of the arguments made by Anselm and Descartes, and the criticism leveled at them by Kant.

One of the most significant ontological arguments that have been made is Anselm’s argument for the existence of God. Anselm makes several important claims to advance his argument, the most significant of which is that God is a being that one that is greater cannot be imagined (Benzmüller and Paleo Automating Gödel's Ontological Proof of God's Existence with Higher-Order Automated Theorem Provers 93). In addition, Anselm argues that God is a being that exists both in the mind and in reality and this is to such an extent that it creates a situation where he is greater than a being that just exists in the mind alone. Moreover, in a situation where God were to exist only in the mind, it would be possible to imagine a being that is greater than God; a situation that would be inconceivable (Benzmüller and Paleo "The Ontological Modal Collapse as a Collapse of the Square of Opposition" 307). Finally, because it is not possible to imagine a being that is greater than the greatest possible being, that is, God, it means that God exists.

In his attempt to prove God’s existence, Descartes sought to revise the argument made by Anselm. He argued that God’s existence can be found out through his nature, in the same way that ideas in geometry can be deduced from the nature of shapes (Descartes 3). He further argued that God is perceived as being a perfect being, in such a way that all perfections derive from him. A consequence is that it leads to a situation where God can be used as a predicate of perfection, and this in such a way that it includes existence. Therefore, if the concept of God did not include existence, it would mean that God would not be the essence of perfection because he would be lacking in perfection (Descartes 24). The notion that the existence of a perfect God does not exist is unintelligible because it is the notion of perfection that essentially means that God actually exists.

Kant, on the other hand, is extremely critical of the ontological argument, stating that the concept of God is one that is based on pure thought. He bases this argument on the belief that the existence of God is one that is essentially outside of the realms of experience and nature. Kant argues that the existence of God cannot be verified through experience, and this is especially considering that to do so would require individuals to actually have a direct experience of God (Proops 11). It is therefore impossible to recognize how God can be verified because there is a lack of experience concerning him. He contrasts the attempt to verify God with that of material concepts, which can be verified through the senses.

Kant’s critique of the ontological arguments can be used as a means of criticizing Anselm’s and Descartes’ versions of the arguments concerning the existence of God. This is especially the case considering that the arguments made by Anselm and Descartes are based on pure reason to such an extent that they do not seek out any evidence concerning the existence of God. Kant, on the other hand, argues that proof existence can only be achieved through the senses, meaning that it is essential to make sure that a concept is verifiable before proof of existence is given. Kant, therefore, seems to promote the idea that it is essential for sensory proof to be achieved before proof of existence can be verified.

In conclusion, Kant’s critique of the ontological argument concerning the existence of God is incorrect. This is because it fails to consider that there are certain elements that exist without any sensory recognition of their existence. Furthermore, Kant’s argument is one that there are certain concepts that exist both in the mind and reality, as stated by Anselm, that do not rely on the senses in order to be verified. Rather, conclusions concerning the existence of certain beings or entities can be made through the use of common sense, which relies on the observance of the world and the diversity of elements within it. Therefore, while Kant’s argument is essentially based on the premise that something cannot exist without the presence of sensory confirmation, it fails to consider that there are other elements that defy the senses, and that they are based solely on reason.

 

 

 

 

 

Works Cited

Automating Gödel's Ontological Proof of God's Existence with Higher-Order Automated Theorem Provers. Proceedings of the Twenty-first European Conference on Artificial Intelligence. 2014. IOS Press. Print.

Benzmüller, Christoph, and Bruno Woltzenlogel Paleo. "The Ontological Modal Collapse as a Collapse of the Square of Opposition." The Square of Opposition: A Cornerstone of Thought. Springer, 2017. 307-13. Print.

Descartes, René. "Meditations on First Philosophy." Central Works of Philosophy  (2015): 1 - 48. Print.

Proops, Ian. "Kant on the Ontological Argument." Noûs 49.1 (2015): 1-27. Print.

Tannen and Baldwin - A comparison

Language is one of the most powerful attributes of a society or culture because it works to ensure that there is a definition of these concepts in such a way that allows individuals to come to terms with them. This is especially the case considering that it is a powerful tool in making sure that there is the establishment of the unique identities of those individuals that make use of it. In the contemporary world, language has come to define the way that individuals perceive themselves within their own societies. This situation is extremely important in the essays “Wears jump suit. Sensible shoes. Uses husband’s last name” and “If Black English isn’t a language, then tell me, what is?” by Deborah Tannen and James Baldwin respectively. In this paper, a comparative analysis of Tannen’s and Baldwin’s essays will be conducted in order to show how language is used to articulate social realities, enforce social dominance, and create the social divide based on gender and class.

One of the most significant aspects of these two essays is that they promote the idea that language is used to give meaning to social realities. This is especially the case considering that language enables individuals to show their preferences as well as their backgrounds. Baldwin gives the example of the manner through which French, despite being considered a unified language, is actually expressed differently in various French speaking regions such as Paris, Marseilles, or Quebec (Baldwin 5). The manner through which individuals speak the language indicates the region from which they hail, and while some of the words that are used may be similar; their meanings in the different regions may be quite different. Tannen furthers this idea through the use of the term “marked”, which she defines as the manner through which language alters the meaning of a word through the addition of a linguistic particle that alone does not have a meaning (Tannen). This is an extremely important aspect of both these essays because they show that language can be manipulated by its users in such a way that it is able to convey meaning only to those who make use of it on a daily basis, within a community or region, rather than for all users of the language. The result is that some users of a language can create entirely new meanings for some of the words within it in order to convey a particular meaning to them but not to other users of the language.

Moreover, language is made use of to enforce the dominance of one part of society over the other. This is especially articulated by Baldwin, who analyses the legitimacy of Black English in the United States. He suggests that Black English has essentially not been given the recognition it deserves because to do so would force the dominant white community to come to terms with its own past. In addition, Baldwin considers Black English to be a language that has developed over time as a reflection of the unique experiences that the black population had to undergo from the period of slavery (Baldwin 6). Tannen also addresses the manner through which language is used to enforce gender and class in the context of male dominance. She provides the example of the manner through which women in social settings are perceived, especially when it comes to the way that they dress and the message that it sends to their male counterparts (Tannen). Tannen considers such situations to enforce male dominance because men are not always required to take the time and effort as women to make themselves presentable. Instead, they can remain unmarked in such a way that there is nothing unique about their appearance. Tannen also suggests that the English language is one that is enforces male dominance, as seen in the way that words are compartmentalized as either male or female, as seen through the endings of words with ess or ette being considered female (Tannen).

In conclusion, Tannen’s and Baldwin’s essays have shown that language can be used in a diversity of contexts to enforce social expectations and express the unique backgrounds of its users. These essays are extremely relevant to the understanding of the various ways through which language can be used in a diversity of contexts to establish meanings for its users. Through the various examples that are provided within them, these essays help their readers come to terms with their social realities, both positive and negative, and opens their eyes to those situations that they would otherwise not have noticed, or have taken for granted.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Works Cited

Baldwin, James. "If Black English Isn't a Language, Then Tell Me, What Is?" The Black Scholar 27.1 (1997): 5-6. Print.

Tannen, Deborah. "Wears Jump Suit. Sensible Shoes. Uses Husband’s Last Name." The New York Times Magazine 20 (1993). Print.