Kant's Critique Of The Ontological Arguments Of God's Existence

Recently,the Ontological Arguments of God's Existence has been hotly debated in China.This issue was initiated in the Wechat group “Kant Philosopher Community” by Professor Shu Yuanzhao.Yang Yunfei,Hu Hao,Li Kezheng and other scholars participated in and heatedly debated.Hu Hao also organized a book club to read related texts.In this context,the author chose “Kant's Critique of the Ontological Proof of the Existence of God” as the title,to take this opportunity to clarify many details inside and the macro framework of Kant's critique of the Ontological Arguments of God's Existence.As for details,this discussion focuses on the following three issues: 1.The relationship between being and existence,2.The definition of real predicate,3.The relationship between existence and predicate.For the first question,the author believes that “being” and “existence” are the same,because when the two act as predicates,they are the same in affirming the important characteristics of something and the reality of being things.For the second question,the author believes that the real predicate is a comprehensive predicate,because the real predicate is one that can be added to the concept of the subject,which can expand the concept of the subject,so the real predicate is not included in the concept of the subject,so as to be synthesis.For the third question,this thesis claims that “being” is a realistic predicate.The two concepts of “subjective synthesis” and “priori material”have long been neglected,and the author would derive my own explanation through text analysis.In terms of the macro framework,how did Kant criticize the Ontological Proof of the Being of God? This thesis reconstructs Kant's second round of argumentation and refutation.The core of the first round of ontological proof is that the being of God can be obtained by analyzing the concept of God.Kant's rebuttal is that the being of God is the conditional necessity of things.And it depends on a condition that assumes that the object of the subject exists.Only when the subject is recognized,the negation of the predicate will lead to contradictions.Otherwise,there will be no contradiction at all,then God must exist conditionally.As long as this condition is removed,it is possible that God does not exist.The core of the second round of ontological proof is that God as Supreme Being cannot be cancelled.Once canceled,it will contradict itself.For the second round of proof,Kant hastwo rebuttals: First,“God being” is a subjective comprehensive proposition.The subject is only bound to the object of the subject,and there is no such relationship with the predicate,so that God does not necessarily exist.Second,being is not a real predicate,but a realistic predicate.The realistic predicate is the affirmation of the being of the object corresponding to the subject concept,but the perception of God's object cannot be given to us,so that the proposition that God exists is a fallacy.Finally,Kant concluded that the being of God cannot be used to prove the existence of God,so the ontological proof of God's existence ended in failure.The academia has also questioned Kant's criticism.For Wood's query,the author's response is that his first question confuses the concept of realistic and of conceptual.Concerning his second query,since the ideal of God only stipulates all empirical things,not stipulate the objects of realistic.Stipulating the objects of realistic requires participation of experience,so the rebuttal is not established.Regarding Fudge's doubts,the author's response is that Fudge's consideration,which included that Kant's proposition is untenable,only by distinguishing different relations of contain without further dividing subjective synthesis and objective synthesis,is incomplete.