15.03.17 Immanuel Kant’s Criticism of the Ontological Argument
Immanuel Kant’s Criticism of the Ontological Argument
Introduction:
Immanuel Kant opposes Anselm of Canterbury and René Descartes’ form of
the Ontological Argument to prove the existence of God.
Kant argues that God does not need a necessary existence and existence
cannot be established as a predicate (something that can be ascribed a quality
or property) for anything in general.
First Criticism: God’s necessary existence
Kant agreed with Descartes’ a priori reasoning that a three-sided shape must
necessarily be a triangle by definition.
However Kant disagreed with Descartes’ reasoning that denying God’s
existence is a tantamount (equivalent) to denying God’s existence as Kant
thinks this reasoning is contradicting.
o Kant reinforces this further when Kant states that “It would be self-
contradictory to posit a triangle and yet reject its three angles but there
is no contradiction in rejecting the triangle together with its three
angles”.
If you deny the existence of a triangle, it is necessary to deny the predicate of
the triangle too as the predicate is not contradicting with the subject.
o For example, in order to deny the existence of a triangle, it is necessary
that you must deny both: its predicate of three sides and the subject of
the triangle itself not just one of them.
o This is because; a triangle that has existence (in reality) has the predicate
of three sides.
However, a triangle that has no existence (but is only made up in the mind)
can still have the same predicate of three sides.
1
Immanuel Kant’s Criticism of the Ontological Argument
Introduction:
Immanuel Kant opposes Anselm of Canterbury and René Descartes’ form of
the Ontological Argument to prove the existence of God.
Kant argues that God does not need a necessary existence and existence
cannot be established as a predicate (something that can be ascribed a quality
or property) for anything in general.
First Criticism: God’s necessary existence
Kant agreed with Descartes’ a priori reasoning that a three-sided shape must
necessarily be a triangle by definition.
However Kant disagreed with Descartes’ reasoning that denying God’s
existence is a tantamount (equivalent) to denying God’s existence as Kant
thinks this reasoning is contradicting.
o Kant reinforces this further when Kant states that “It would be self-
contradictory to posit a triangle and yet reject its three angles but there
is no contradiction in rejecting the triangle together with its three
angles”.
If you deny the existence of a triangle, it is necessary to deny the predicate of
the triangle too as the predicate is not contradicting with the subject.
o For example, in order to deny the existence of a triangle, it is necessary
that you must deny both: its predicate of three sides and the subject of
the triangle itself not just one of them.
o This is because; a triangle that has existence (in reality) has the predicate
of three sides.
However, a triangle that has no existence (but is only made up in the mind)
can still have the same predicate of three sides.
1
