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.