Quiz
Immanuel Kant, “The Impossibility of an
Ontological Proof of the Existence of God”
For Kant, which of the following is
nonsense (not logically possible)?
A.
B.
C.
Having no idea of triangles and no idea of three-sided shapes.
(Incorrect. Many people, especially young children, have no idea
what triangles are, and hence don’t know what three-sided
shapes are. “But if we reject subject and predicate alike, there is
no contradiction; for nothing is then left that can be contradicted.”
558-9)
Having an idea of triangles but no idea of three-sided shapes.
(Correct. It is impossible to know what a triangle is without
knowing what a three-sided shape is. “To posit a triangle, and yet
reject its three angles, is self-contradictory…” 559)
Having an idea of triangles and having an idea of three-sided
shapes. (Incorrect. This is not only logically possible, but logically
necessary. If one has an idea of a triangle, then one necessarily
has an idea of a three sided shape.)
If the definition of ‘God’ really is “a
being that must necessarily exist”,
what does Kant think that proves?
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
God must necessarily exist (Incorrect. The whole point of Kant’s article is to claim
that an ontological proof is impossible. See the title of the article.)
If God exists then God necessarily exists. (This is the correct response. Defining
God as something that necessarily exists only defines a concept of God. If that
concept matches up with some object in the world, then that object is God and
exists, and if God exists, then by definition God necessarily exists. See 559-560)
God does not necessarily exist (Incorrect. Kant thinks it is true that God does not
necessarily exist, but the question is what the definition of God as necessarily
existing proves.)
God exists (Incorrect. The purpose of the article is to dispute Anselm’s proof.
Disputing a proof of existence does not establish that the thing in question (God
in this case) exists).
God does not exist (Incorrect. The lack of proof of one thing does not constitute
proof of its opposite.)
What point does Kant Make about the
hundred thalers (dollars)?
A. If we have an idea of a hundred thalers, there must
actually be a hundred thalers in existence. (Incorrect. Kant
never says this, and anyway, we can imagine 99 trillion
dollars, even though nowhere near that many dollars
exist)
B. There is a difference between the concept of a hundred
thalers and the existence of a hundred thalers. (Correct.
“My financial position is, however, affected very
differently by a hundred real thalers than it is by the mere
concept of them…” 559)
C. We cannot have the idea of a hundred thalers without
there actually being a hundred thalers. (Incorrect. Kant
never says this, and anyway, we could imagine a fake
currency without any trouble.) (e.g. gold-pressed latinum)
For Kant, what is the status of the
sentence, ‘God exists.’?
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
It is false. (Incorrect. Kant never claims to settle the question of God’s
existence, only the status of ontological proofs.)
It is true. (Incorrect. See above.)
It is not capable of being either true or false. (Incorrect. Kant believes
that either God exists or that God does not exist.)
It is a sentence without a meaningful subject. (incorrect. See quote
below.)
It is a sentence without a meaningful predicate. (Correct. “If, now, we
take the subject (God) with all its predicates, and say ‘God is’, or ‘There is
a God’, we attach no new predicate to the concept of God, but only posit
the subject itself…” 559)