Weaknesses Of Descartes Ontological Argument Essays

Despite the ontological argument seeming to be a strong, convincing argument for proof for the existence of God, it comes under heavy scrutiny from its weaknesses.Fundamental to Anselm’s and Descartes’ form of the ontological argument is that existence is a predicate – an attribute or quality that can be possessed or lacked, such as size, shape, colour, temperature, personality, intelligence or traits.Descartes realised that doubting all of his knowledge proved his existence: “I think, therefore I am.” Similar to Anselm, Descartes defined God as an infinitely perfect being superior to all beings in perfection.However this is a weak criticism of the ontological argument and the strengths are more convincing because Gaunilo is applying the...

If this is the case, then Hume’s argument is fairly robust and harsh and the ontological argument could have some grounding.A:Explain the traditional forms of the Ontological argument as put forward by Anselm and Descartes: .B: The Ontological argument is only in the mind and is therefore a weak argument .Furthermore, the argument intends to prove a supreme being, one which is good and omniscient, and not merely a vague “first cause.” In this essay i shall explain the argument formulated by Anselm, as well as the advancement put forth by Descartes.However, the ontological argument itself is an a priori argument, meaning it needs no empirical evidence at all.

Notes: 1) An immediate objection may be that Descartes has set himself a trap of circularity - if he can know nothing without prior knowledge of the existence of God, how can he form premises for proving that God exists?Despite this, the fact that the second version relies on the premises and presupposed conclusions of the first version means that it retains the same weaknesses of the first version.Descartes then proceeds to apply the Causal Adequacy Principle to ideas.The Trademark Argument arises out of the fact claimed by Descartes that there is within each of us an idea of a supreme being, which was placed within us by the thing that created us.Secondly, when inquiring about his causal origins, the emphasis is most certainly on findi...

Therefore, Descartes reasons, God exists.If Kant’s view is correct then The Ontological Argument fails, if existence is not a real predicate that is added on to the subject then to deny existence you take away the whole subject.The argument succeeds as it is deductive and clear conclusions can be drawn from it, this leaves the argument with only one answer; God exists.This argument only succeeds if existence is regarded as a predicate; Descartes argues that God possesses necessary existence in the same way that a triangle does three sides; this analogy is a main weakness of Descartes argument.The principle of the Ontological Argument regards this as being as an attribute.

To demonstrate the latter, Descartes presents multiple proofs of God’s existence, the cosmological and the ontological arguments.While Descartes’ cosmological proof that God exists relies on causality for its foundation, in part five of Meditations he also provides ontological proof to back it up.Descartes ontological argument is far less convincing than his cosmological argument.In essence, Descartes logical argument for his ontological proof of God’s existence is that he can experience the idea of God as a the most perfect being, existence is part of God’s essence and His existence is more perfect than human thoughts about it, so therefore God exists in reality as the most perfect being: “because I cannot conceive God unless as existin...

Therefore as Richard Dawkins would describe it ‘infinite, playground argument’ and does not demonstrate God’s existence.However from an empirical view, Thomas Aquinas would argue that the flaw in the ontological arguments attempt to demonstrate God’s existence stems from the fact that Anselm wanted to argue that God’s existence can be proven from ‘de dicto’ instead of what is ‘real’, and this caused the argument to be weak.Descartes famously wrote his version of the ontological argument in the ‘Meditations’ in which he argued that God is an infinite being, perfect.They would argue that the ontological argument failed to understand and make existence a meaning of God.This proves according to Descartes that God’s existence is necessary.

Overall, the weaknesses generally give support to atheism as they show alternatives and flaws in the ontological argument.Anselm’s ontological argument described in part (a), was refuted in his own lifetime, by Gaunilo, who demonstrated in a reduction ad absurdum of his own, that if the logic of the argument were applied to things other than God, it led to invalid conclusions.Thomas Aquinas had already questioned this aspect of the ontological argument, claiming that Anselm was guilty of making ‘transitional error’ – moving from the definition of God to the existence of Him.Therefore, if the ontological argument works, then the argument for the existence of the perfect island must work too.This weakness of the ontological argument adds f...

Given that Descartes had recourse to a certain schema of causality even for setting up the doubt experiment, and that his first demonstration of the existence of God rests on the assumption that causality is operative in a world defined by the constraints of the First Meditation, it is possible to hold that the universe to which Descartes confines himself is a universe for two, a world constituted by the experimenter and a certain being whose attributes he does not yet know well.(2) John Cottingham holds that Descartes left the task of investigating the nature of God to later stages of the Meditations and that the question concerning the truth of the propositions of logic and mathematics is left "hanging in the air" since the evil demon ...

The major claim of the ontological argument is that existence and God are paired and are necessary for each other.Overall it must be said that the bias of the argument is obvious and influences the argument so much that at times it makes unreasonable assumptions thus weakening its argument.Descartes also an ontological philosopher had a similar approach claiming that as good is perfection, and existence is a perfection, God must exist.This deductive argument was also put forward by others such as Descartes and Malcolm.(10 marks) The ontological argument is focussed entirely that God does exist without doubt, and this is one of the most vital flaws to the argument.

Smaller weaknesses in Cartesian theory question the dualistic ontology in other organisms aside from humans.For, regardless of whether they possess a ‘blik’ or not, there is an element in Descartes’ work “I think therefore I am” that rings truer to the human mind than any other philosopher’s, something indisputable and identifiable, and thus worthy of upholding.Thus, Ryle used this concept to say that the soul is not something that is unidentifiably extra to the body; essentially exposing a flaw in Descartes’ argument.Indeed, Leibniz agreed with Descartes in that the mind and body belong to two separate realms; however Leibniz rejected the idea that the mind and body, two separate substances could causally interact (inter-substantial cau...

I shall first explain what Descartes's argument for God's existence is, and then present his argument in propositional form.Descartes' Meditations Ontological Argument .Descartes, Rene.In his reply to Descartes's argument, Gassendi complains that "... .The Ontological Argument.

However, I am sure Descartes would want to add that there are two grades of existence.Descartes argument can be presented quite simply as: .For Descartes this is an example of a clear and distinct idea.Descartes would no doubt agree with Kant that there is no conceptual difference between something that actually exists and imagining the same thing as existing.It is also useful when trying to understand Descartes to keep in mind that he talks about two types of existence.

In a way God’s existence could be a synthetic statement, which would mean that it would need to proven before the statement was true or not, the reason for this is because whether God exists or not does not prove his existence in reality as Anselm suggests in his argument.Descarte also uses the idea of the triangle in his argument, he writes that even if we think of triangles having four sides, the truth will not change; the triangle will remain to have 3 sides.His argument, for Descarte, demonstrates God’s existence this argument is a priori and uses pure logic, and so for him God’s existence is an analytic statement.For Descarte the triangle is God, he believes that God is immutable and will not change even if humans think he does not ...

This is where the ontological argument falls down.A criticism of the argument was put forward by Thomas Aquinas, who had already questioned the important aspect of the ontological argument, the idea that we cannot assign existence a priori to our definition of the idea of a perfect being.The ontological argument differs from other arguments in favour of God because of the fact that it is an a priori deductive argument.A criticism of Anselm’s ontological argument directly was from Gaunilo, he had the same idea as Kant, that something cannot be defined into existence.The second philosopher to argue the existence of God using the ontological argument was Rene Descartes; he set out his argument firstly by defining God as ‘a supremely perfect...

Descartes discovers that he is unable to doubt the “I”, for it is the “I” itself that is doubting, i.e.With both Descartes’ and Kant’s objections discredited, Anselm’s ontology must stand as the best, being the simplest and most intuitive.Kant’s complaint, on the other hand, is not really an argument at all, but rather a boast that he has not has to use the words “God exists” anywhere in his philosophy.Descartes’ complaint was that the proof given by Anselm is wholly ideal, without reference to the phenomenal world to give it substance.But instead of holding back doubt Descartes allows it full reign.

The Ontological Argument .Aquinus had another version of his argument – the argument from motion, that is to say that everything has a cause and described as  move and mover.Another form of the cosmological argument was put forward by medieval Islamic scholars and is known as the Kalam argument.According to the Chambers Dictionary of Beliefs and Religions, page382, this argument was put forward by Anselm and Descartes among others.Rene Descartes, 17 .

The first argument was just a glorified version of the principle of cause and effect, and although the ontological version was good, it is just the stereotypical ontological argument about god, or maybe just because I learned about his arguments first with other philosophers that I found his very dull.Descartes argument here is that God’s mere Characteristic proves his existence, saying that for god to be perfect, he must exist, for actual existence is a perfection for existing is better than not to exist, so God would lack perfection or would not be perfect if he does not exist, therefore, the idea of a “God” that doesn’t exist is not actually GOD at all, but something with imperfection.Now, the ontological argument of the existence of ...

A first distinctive feature of the ontological argument is the deductive nature of it.The main proponents of this argument are Anselm, Descartes, Malcolm, and Platinga and the main opponents are Aquinas, Kant, and Gaunilo.When looking at the weaknesses of this argument, it becomes clear that this argument fails at proving the existence of God.Anselm explains that atheists have failed to understand ‘the full implications of the concept of God’ (Tyler and Reid), and if the atheist had grasped the full concept, it would be impossible for him/her to deny God’s existence.The argument concludes that the definition of God ultimately infers his existence, and Anselm, who was the main proponent of the argument argued that the existence of God was...

To the major premise, he objects that there is an unqualified passage from the logical to the ontological level.The Ontological Argument .Jaeschke, III, p.324.The ontological argument presented by Descartes in the fifth Meditation is essentially a modern version of Anselm's argument.The ontological argument can be exposed in a syllogistic way: everything I conceive as belonging clearly and distinctly to the nature or essence of something can be asserted as true of something.

It is admitted that Descartes took up Anselme's argument in his work, but there is no source to support him with certainty.The ontological argument is an argument which aims to prove the existence of God.Bertrand Russell rejects the validity of the ontological argument: for him, this argument stems from a logical error: confusion between two distinct orders of predicates: first order predicates confused with second order predicates .In On the existence of God and the inexistence of unicorns, Gilles Dowek refutes the ontological argument by using the correction theorem (reciprocal of Gödel's completeness theorem ).The same goes for the ontological argument.

There is only one such being…God.(Anslem) Descartes points out that if you imagine a triangle, one of its main properties is that it has three sides and three corners.The Ontological Argument Presented by Descartes and the Cosmological Argument Presented by Aquinas Descartes, often called the father of modern philosophy, developed Anselm’s argument, in attempting to prove God’s existence from simply the meaning of the word ‘God’.Descartes expands his point, this time referring to the properties of God.Descartes says that trying to imagine God without the predicate of existence is illogical, like imagining a triangle without three sides!

Thus, based on the objections noted, Ontological Argument appears to be defective.This argument was first recorded by St. Anslem (1033-1109)....us, if God existed, then by Descartes reasoning he would be perfect, but if he does not exist, this does not take away from his perfection.This argument appears justifiable, but the feeling that something went amok lingers.Descartes thinks of “a supremely perfect being” (Cottingham, 1996) just as he thinks of the triangle.

According to Descartes, this idea is not “imaginary or fictitious” because God is the only thing that can be conceived as having a “true and immutable nature.” .Descartes uses the inscription of a rhombus into a circle to illustrate this issue.Rather, Descartes begins his argument in a different manner then Anselm, speaking nothing about prior faith in God’s existence.Descartes then continues addressing an objection in regards to his prior argument.There have been many attempts to refute the arguments of Anselm and Descartes.

He discovers that sense experience can be put to doubt, but Descartes cannot doubt that he actually doubts.In his epistemological quest for truth, through thought experiment, Descartes’ Meditations offers the reader a method of doubt that could be used in order to discover what is absolutely certain, and free oneself from the errors caused by misjudgments.Since Descartes got to prove the God's existence, he holds that man can have confident in his clear and distinct idea and reason.Ontological argument tries to prove the existence of God from a priori perspective, i.e., idea implanted in the human mind by God himself.Descartes’ purpose is to find indubitable truth.

Although this has been already touched on above, it is worth repeating: it can be effectively argued that Descartes' understanding of God does not mean He actually exists.Causal Adequacy Principle means that an... ... middle of paper ... ...e in reality is meant, not existence in the understanding, or in fiction, etc.Explain and illustrate with an example the causal adequacy principle.What does it have to do with the trademark argument?The ontological argument consistently appears to be defining Him into existence, even though its supporters, Descartes among them, claim that this is not the case.

The idea of God for all beings, at the time of Descartes specifically, were brought up religious and instilled with the idea of God.The key part to Descartes system however is the Clear and Distinct Rule: ‘Everything that I perceive very clearly and distinctly is true.’ To prove that what we see clearly and distinctly to be true is essential to establish a foundation to build upon.As previously stated, the proofs of God’s existence played an essential role in Descartes system, as he had established that he was created by an all-powerful, non-deceiving God, Descartes could then place a great deal of trust in his cognitive abilities.Firstly the ontological argument for the existence of God is a priori proof, which is independent of experie...

The work is narrated in the first person perspective as Descartes acts as the ‘mediator’ on the infallibility of the senses through the use of ontological arguments which determine the source and essence of knowledge as well as the proof of God’s existence.In conclusion, Descartes’ dream argument and the dilemma of reality are answered through the use of doubt and logic.Descartes narrates that a dream experience provides him an understanding of an object itself.Critical Evaluation The dream argument provides the basis of Descartes methodological doubt where the senses provide a false impression of reality.Descartes’ propositions are considered true in the sense that the dream argument provides substantial evidence supporting the infallib...

There are many problems with Descartes’ argument.Descartes’ first argument can be summarized as an attempt to prove God’s existence by causal reasoning.One of such critics puts it thus, “I can surely take a given degree of being, which I perceive within myself, and add on a further degree of being, and thus construct the idea of a perfect being from all the degrees which are capable of being added on.” If finite minds can construct the idea of infinity or perfection in this manner, we do not need to look outside of ourselves in an attempt to account for the origin of our idea of infinity.’ Though many theologians who used this argument agree that there is the existence of God, they simply think that Descartes provided an inadequate argum...

Descartes says that trying to imagine God without the predicate of existence is illogical, like imagining a triangle without three sides!Similar to the ontological argument, the cosmological argument, also known as the first cause argument, is a classical argument for the existence of God.The ontological argument, in whichever version, has been the object of a great deal of philosophical criticism.The ontological argument is a priori argument.(Anslem) .. Descartes points out that if you imagine a triangle, one of its main properties is that it has three sides and three corners.

St. Anselm came up with the first and most well-known ontological argument (Oppy, 2012, para.Despite flaws and problems found in some ontological arguments and the objections raised to those arguments, ontological arguments still provide a phenomenal vehicle for ontological discussion through St. Anselm’s original ideas and argument, objections raised, and revisions of previous arguments.For nearly a thousand years, the ontological argument has captured the attention of philosophers.Now, that’s exactly what St. Anselm’s ontological argument is; it’s a claim of existence.Thought experimenting with god: revisiting the ontological argument.