Arguments for the Existence of God: Ontological

AQA

A-Level

Examine the ontological argument as an a priori, deductive proof for the existence of God, predicated on the analysis of the concept of the divine. Trace the intellectual lineage from St. Anselm's definition of God as 'that than which nothing greater can be conceived' in the Proslogion, through Descartes' identification of existence as a perfection, to the critical dismantling by Kant regarding existence as a predicate. Evaluate modern rehabilitations using modal logic (Malcolm, Plantinga) and assess the argument's status as either a logical proof or an expression of 'faith seeking understanding'.

Objectives

Exam Tips

Pitfalls

Key Terms

Mark Points

Learning Objectives

What you need to know and understand

Anselm's definition: 'That than which nothing greater can be conceived' (aliquid quo nihil maius cogitari possit).
Gaunilo's text: 'On Behalf of the Fool' and the Perfect Island analogy.
Kant's specific critique: 'Existence is not a real predicate' (Critique of Pure Reason).
Descartes' analogy: God's existence is as inseparable from his essence as the angles of a triangle are from the triangle.
Malcolm's distinction: God's existence is either impossible or necessary; it cannot be contingent.

Example Examiner Feedback

Real feedback patterns examiners use when marking

"You have stated Kant's criticism; now explain *how* it undermines Descartes' specific claim about perfection."
"Differentiate clearly between 'existence in the mind' (in intellectu) and 'existence in reality' (in re) in your explanation."
"Your evaluation relies on asserting the argument fails; provide the logical justification for *why* the premise is flawed."
"Integrate Malcolm's response to Kant to demonstrate higher-level dialectical analysis."

Marking Points

Key points examiners look for in your answers

Award AO1 marks for explicitly distinguishing between Anselm's first formulation (existence in intellectu vs in re) and second formulation (necessary existence).
Credit responses that accurately define 'deductive' and 'analytic', explaining how the conclusion claims to follow necessarily from the premises.
For AO2, candidates must evaluate whether Kant's objection ('existence is not a real predicate') successfully defeats Descartes' claim that existence is a perfection.
High-level responses must assess Norman Malcolm's argument that while contingent existence is not a predicate, necessary existence is a property of God.

Examiner Tips

Expert advice for maximising your marks

💡For 'Examine' questions (AO1), focus entirely on the logical steps of the argument; do not include criticisms or evaluation.
💡When using Gaunilo, explicitly state that he uses 'reductio ad absurdum' to demonstrate the flaw in Anselm's logic.
💡In 'Evaluate' essays (AO2), ensure the conclusion matches the weight of the argument; do not sit on the fence if the logic fails.
💡Use the 'Triangle Analogy' to explain Descartes, but ensure you explain the link between the triangle's angles and God's existence.

Common Mistakes

Pitfalls to avoid in your exam answers

Confusing Anselm's Proslogion 2 (God as the greatest conceivable being) with Proslogion 3 (God as a necessary being).
Asserting that Gaunilo's 'Perfect Island' criticizes the concept of God, rather than the logic of the argument itself.
Failing to explain *why* Kant argues existence is not a predicate (it adds nothing to the concept of the subject).
Treating the argument as empirical or inductive rather than a priori and deductive.

Study Guide Available

Comprehensive revision notes & examples

Read Study Guide

Key Terminology

Essential terms to know

Likely Command Words

How questions on this topic are typically asked

Examine

Explain

Evaluate

Assess

Discuss

To what extent

Ready to test yourself?

Practice questions tailored to this topic