Ontological argument Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.Anti-spam check. Do not fill this in! ===Immanuel Kant=== [[File:Kant foto.jpg|thumb|upright=0.7|left|Immanuel Kant proposed that existence is not a predicate.]] [[Immanuel Kant]] put forward an influential criticism of the ontological argument in his ''[[Critique of Pure Reason]]''.<ref name="KdrV">{{Cite book |last=Kant |first=Immanuel |title=Critique of Pure Reason |publisher=Macmillan and Company Limited |others=Norman Kemp Smith |year=1958 |edition=2nd |location=London, England |pages=500–507 |orig-year=1787}} (first edition, pp. 592–603; second edition, pp. 620–631).</ref> His criticism is primarily directed at Descartes, but also attacks Leibniz. It is shaped by his central [[Analytic–synthetic distinction|distinction between analytic and synthetic propositions]]. In an analytic proposition, the predicate concept is contained in its subject concept; in a synthetic proposition, the predicate concept is not contained in its subject concept. Kant questions the intelligibility of the concept of a necessary being. He considers examples of necessary propositions, such as "a triangle has three angles", and rejects the transfer of this logic to the [[existence of God]]. First, he argues that such necessary propositions are necessarily true only if such a being exists: ''If'' a triangle exists, it must have three angles. The necessary proposition, he argues, does not make the existence of a triangle necessary. Thus he argues that, if the proposition "X exists" is posited, it would follow that, ''if'' X exists, it exists necessarily; this does not mean that X exists in reality.<ref>{{cite web | url=http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant-metaphysics | title=Kant's Critique of Metaphysics | publisher=Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy |date=February 28, 2004| access-date=2011-10-30 | author=Grier, Michelle}}</ref> Second, he argues that contradictions arise only when the predicate is rejected but the subject is maintained and, therefore, a judgement of non-existence cannot be a contradiction, as it denies the subject.<ref name="KdrV" /> Kant then proposes that the statement "God exists" must be analytic or synthetic—the predicate must be inside or outside of the subject, respectively. If the proposition is analytic, as the ontological argument takes it to be, then the statement would be true only because of the meaning given to the words. Kant claims that this is merely a tautology and cannot say anything about reality. However, if the statement is synthetic, the ontological argument does not work, as the existence of God is not contained within the definition of God (and, as such, evidence for God would need to be found).<ref>{{cite book | title=Philosophy for Understanding Theology | publisher=Westminster John Knox Press | year=2007 |page=165 | isbn=978-0-664-23180-4 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=Mc5wweqfm-gC&q=kant+%22ontological+argument%22+tautology&pg=PA165 | last1=Allen | first1=Diogenes | last2=Springsted | first2=Eric O.}}</ref> Kant goes on to write, "'being' is evidently not a real predicate"<ref name="KdrV" /> and cannot be part of the concept of something. He proposes that existence is not a predicate, or quality. This is because existence does not add to the essence of a being, but merely indicates its occurrence in reality. He states that by taking the subject of God with all its predicates and then asserting that God exists, "I add no new predicate to the conception of God". He argues that the ontological argument works only if existence is a predicate; if this is not so, he claims the ontological argument is invalidated, as it is then conceivable a completely perfect being doesn't exist.<ref name="IEP" /> In addition, Kant claims that the concept of God is not one of a particular sense; rather, it is an "object of pure thought".<ref name="KdrV" /> He asserts that God exists outside the realm of experience and nature. Because we cannot experience God through experience, Kant argues that it is impossible to know how we would verify God's existence. This is in contrast to material concepts, which can be verified by means of the senses.<ref>{{cite book | title=Kant's doctrine of transcendental illusion | publisher=Cambridge University Press | author=Grier, Michelle | year=2001 |page=258 | isbn=978-0-521-66324-3 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=jjiIyXvOPAwC&q=kant+ontological+argument+%22object+of+pure+thought%22&pg=PA258}}</ref> Summary: Please note that all contributions to Christianpedia may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here. You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource (see Christianpedia:Copyrights for details). Do not submit copyrighted work without permission! Cancel Editing help (opens in new window) Discuss this page