ARGUMENTS FOR MONOTHEISM 179E In each argument, if the second premise is true, the argument is
sound.
F Premise 2y is true if and only if premise 2z is true, so we need concern
ourselves only with one of them; we will use 2y.
G It is logically impossible that more than one (or that less than one) of
these three premises be true: premise 2 of the Ontological Argument,
premise 2x, premise 2y.
What is crucial in evaluating the Ontological Argument is that this
argument does not establish which of these three premises is true. It leaves
that issue completely open. Hence the Ontological Argument fails as a
proof that extends our knowledge. Given the discussion thus far, the point
can be put succinctly as follows. Consider:
o Either God exists is (a) necessarily true, (b) necessarily false, (c)
logically contingent and true, or (d) logically contingent and false.
The Ontological Argument requires that (a) be the right alternative. But
that argument contains the thesis that (a) is the right alternative – that is
what premise 2 of the argument says. No argument is given to the effect
that (a) is the right alternative. Granted, (a) does not seem self-
contradictory; but nor do any of (b), (c), or (d), each of which is
incompatible with (a). So we are left without any reason for picking (a) as
the truth.
Another look at the Ontological Argument
1 It is logically possible that God has maximal excellence if the concept
of God is not contradictory.
2 The concept of God is not contradictory. So:
3 It is logically possible that God has maximal excellence.
4 If it is logically possible that God has maximal excellence, then God
has maximal excellence. So:
5 God has maximal excellence.
6 If God has maximal excellence, then God exists in all possible worlds.
So:
7 God exists in all possible worlds.
8 If God exists in all possible worlds, then necessarily God exists. So:
9 Necessarily, God exists.