The Ontological Argument for the Existence of God (Opposition beyond Gaunilo)

What is it about?

This is the fifth chapter of The Devil’s Advocate vs. God’s Honest Truth: A Dialectical Inquiry into the Rationality of Religion. It the third of three chapters on the ontological argument for the existence of God. It focuses on the critical reception of the argument beyond the initial reaction of Gaunilo, which is an inseparable part of the original presentation, taken up in chapter 3 (section 3.8) together with the seminal formulation of Anselm. Coverage includes a discussion of the scholarly reception by each of the most influential critics, Thomas Aquinas (section 5.1), David Hume (section 5.2), and Immanuel Kant (section 5.3), followed by a concluding survey and appraisal of modern parodies (section 5.4). The aim is to bring out the most important point made by each contributor. Highlights comprise the objection of Aquinas that we do not know the essence of God, wherefore we cannot deduce from it the existence of God, the observation of Hume that existence is not a property, wherefore it cannot be attributed to the essence of God, and the position of Kant that existence is not a real predicate, wherefore it does not help articulate the concept of God in any way that supports the existence of God. The bulk of the chapter is devoted to the opposition of Kant. The closer attention is a reflection of the critical tendency, both in serious scholarship and in popular debates, to focus on the reception of Kant as the most important challenge to the ontological argument throughout the history of its development as a proof for the existence of God.

Featured Image

Photo by Valdemaras D. on Unsplash

Photo by Valdemaras D. on Unsplash