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.