Barry's Blog

The Ontological Argument

September 22, 2007

The Ontological Argument is an argument which attempts to provide for the existence of God with reason, alone. To give a very basic explanation, it argues that if one can conceive of God, than this implies the actual existence of God. For many:

1. this argument is difficult to understand
2. this argument’s soundness is difficult to understand
3. this argument is considered defective and, consequently, fallacious

However, it is certainly worthy of consideration in conjunction with other arguments for the existence of God. The following represents what I hope to be an understandable form of this argument; and, it is based upon the initial argument presented by Anselm of Canterbury (1033-1109). It is intended for the reasoning atheist.

...

1. When we speak of God, we believe that God is “a being than which nothing greater can be conceived.” That is, God is a being or entity which absolutely nothing greater can be imagined for He is the greatest in every respect.
2. Atheists understand this definition of God but deny that God exists (Psalm 14:1). In other words, God exists in the atheist’s understanding but the atheist does not understand God to “actually” exist. Or, to put it another way, the atheist believes that God exists in the understanding, alone. That is, the atheist can conceive of a being than which nothing greater can be conceived but he will not grant that the being actually exists - it is simply a being that exists in the mind or understanding. For example, elves exist in the understanding, alone. This is different from fantasy writers (such as Terry Brooks) who exists both in the understanding and in reality (Terry Brooks has written numerous books about elves such as “The Sword of Shannara” and currently lives in the Pacific Northwest with his wife, Judine). I suppose that an atheist would put God in the same category as elves.
3. Now, let us suppose that God exists in the understanding, alone (as the atheist asserts). That is, a being than which nothing greater can be conceived exists in the understanding, alone.
4. However, a being than which nothing greater can be conceived can be conceived to exist in reality - not only in the understanding. That is, a being than which nothing greater can be conceived can be conceived to exist in the understanding and in reality.
5. But, if something exists in the understanding as that than which nothing greater can be conceived, and yet can be conceived to actually exist in reality, than that thing can be conceived to be greater than it actually is. That is, this being who exists in reality and understanding is greater than this being who simply exists in the understanding. For, these beings are exactly the same in every respect except one - that the one who is conceived to actually exist is greater, for this being has something the other being doesn’t; namely, actual existence.
6. Yet, this is like saying that God can be conceived to be greater than He actually is. Of course, this is absurd, given our definition of God. How can a being than which nothing greater can be conceived be “less” than another being? He can’t!
7. This being the case, the supposition that God, a being than which nothing greater can be conceived, exists in the understanding, alone, IS FALSE. What was supposed in #3 is simply not true.
8. Therefore, God actually exists in reality. Or, to put it in other words, God not only exists in the understanding but also in reality. God, a being than which nothing greater can be conceived, exists both in the understanding and in reality. To have it any other way is unreasonable and illogical.