Kant's Refutation of Ontological Argument Premise

Kant's critique targets the structure of ontological arguments, particularly how they conceptualize existence.

Ontological Argument Structure

Traditional ontological arguments, like Anselm's, often treat existence as a property or perfection that God must possess. They argue that if God is conceived as the greatest possible being, and existence is a perfection, then God must exist.

Kant's Core Critique

Immanuel Kant famously argued against this line of reasoning. His central point is that existence is not a real predicate. A predicate adds something to the concept of a subject or describes a property of it. Kant contended that saying something 'exists' doesn't add a new property to its concept; rather, it posits the subject itself with all its properties.

For example, the concept of a 'perfect being' includes all perfections. However, adding 'exists' to this concept does not make the concept itself more perfect or add a property. It merely states that such a being is instantiated in reality.

Identifying Kant's Premise

Based on this critique, the statement that forms a crucial premise in Kant's refutation is:

• Existence is not a real predicate.

This premise directly challenges the foundation of ontological arguments, asserting that existence cannot be treated as a property that contributes to the essence or definition of a being, including God.

Let's analyze why other options are less suitable:

• God’s non-existence is impossible: This is often a conclusion or a starting point of ontological arguments themselves (stating God's existence is necessary), not Kant's refutation premise.
• Existence precedes essence: This is a key concept in existentialist philosophy, associated with thinkers like Sartre, not Kant's critique of the ontological argument.
• Suicide is immoral: This relates to Kant's ethical philosophy (deontology), not his metaphysical arguments against the existence of God.