The Existence of God

There are various forms of arguments for the existence of God. Two such arguments are the Ontological and Cosmological arguments. Both the Ontological and Cosmological arguments have their strengths and weaknesses. However, they have been criticized by Immanuel Kant because he disagrees with both arguments. St. Anselm, Rene Descartes, St. Thomas Aquinas and Immanuel Kant all believe in the existence of God, but their theory on his existence differs.

St. Anselm's point of view is one basis for the Ontological argument. St. Anselm believes in God but wants to give a rational explanation of God's existence. He said "God is that, than which nothing greater can be conceived. Even a fool who doesn't believe in God can understand that." God must exist in reality as well as in the mind. It is greater to exist than to not exist. Since we have a working notion of God it would be a contradiction to say God does not exist. Infinite being necessarily exists. It has to exist due to its nature. However, contingent being requires specific evidence or experience. In the single case of God, its notion is enough to guarantee his existence. He says in "Proslogium" "God is whatever it is better to be than not to be; and he, as the only self-existent being, creates all things from nothing." (St. Anselm 79)

Rene Descartes' theory is another basis for the Ontological argument. His theory states that God is a necessary deduction from the data of pure reason. He moves by a means of clear and distinct ideas. Concept of God contains real existence. He says in "Meditations V"

"And not only do I know these things with distinctness when I consider them in general, but, likewise [however little I apply my attention to the matter], I discover an infinitude of particulars respecting numbers, figures, movements, and other such things, whose truth is so manifest, and so well accords with my nature, that when I begin to discover them, it seems to me that I learn nothing new, that is to say, that I for the first time perceive things which were already present to my mind, although I had not as yet applied my mind to them." (Descartes 123)

The strength of the Ontological argument is that it appears to be convincing on an analytical level, in that using your reasoning will lead to the conclusion that God is necessary and therefore exists. The weakness of the Ontological argument however is that it's conclusion is not clearly identifiable from its main statements. The main statements of the Ontological argument are:

1. God is a being than which nothing greater can be conceived.

2. It is greater to exist than to not exist.

The conclusion of those statements, according to St. Anselm and Rene Descartes is that God exists. That conclusion is not logically observable based on the statements.

Immanuel Kant criticized the Ontological argument. Kant said existence is not a real predicate that is added on to the subject. If you deny existence you take away the whole subject. The principle of the Ontological argument is it regards being as an attribute. He is critical of the entailment because it includes hypothetical statements. He says in Critique of Pure Reason

"My financial position is however affected very differently by a hundred real thalers than it is by the mere concept of them (that is, of their possibility.) For the object, as it actually exists, is not analytically contained in my concept, but is added to my concept (which is a determination of my state) synthetically; and yet the conceived hundred thalers are not themselves in the least increased through thus acquiring existence outside my concept." (Kant 505)

The strength of Kant's criticism is that he attacks the argument by essentially using its own words against it. When he says the idea of a non-existent $100 is identical to the idea of an existent $100 and that existence makes no contribution to the conception of $100 he is essentially using the words of the Ontological argument against itself to prove its falsehood. The weakness of Kant's criticism is that Kant ignores that the Ontological argument says existence is stated as a predicate of infinite being only and not of a finite being. His criticism focuses on finite being. I think Kant's criticism of the Ontological argument is more persuasive than the Ontological argument itself because St. Anselm and Descartes' argument does not make much sense when you start to think about what they are conveying in their thesis. Kant's criticism however attacks the Ontological argument and provides a rational and logical explanation for the fallacy of the Ontological argument.

The Cosmological argument was the theory of St. Thomas Aquinas. It is also known as the first cause. There are 5 components of the Cosmological argument.

1. Here is the world or space in time.

2. It could not be the cause of itself.

3. It could not come from nothing.

4. It could not be an effect in an infinite series of causes and effects.

5. Therefore it must be caused by something outside space and time, something uncaused and ultimate.

It begins with the fact of the physical world and then by process of elimination, arrives at God. Aquinas says the existence of God can be proven in 5 ways.

1. Evidence of motion and concludes God