What is your answer?


The ontological proof is called a priori because:

    { 1 } - it argues from cause to effect.
    { 2 } - it argues from the world to God.
    { 3 } - it argues from an idea that is gained before sense experience.
    { 4 } - it argues from sense experience.
    { 5 } - it argues from effect to cause.

<= back | menu | forward =>
Directions: Click on a number from 1 to 5.
























 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

























1 is wrong. Please try again.


The ontological proof is called a priori because:

The ontological argument argues to the existence of God from the idea of God. It does not argue to an effect, because God is not the effect of anything.

<= back | menu | forward =>
























 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

























2 is wrong. Please try again.


The ontological proof is called a priori because:

    { 1 } - it argues from cause to effect.
    { 2 } - it argues from the world to God.
    { 3 } - it argues from an idea that is gained before sense experience.
    { 4 } - it argues from sense experience.
    { 5 } - it argues from effect to cause.

That would be an a posteriori argument, because the world, the effect, comes after the cause, God.

<= back | menu | forward =>
























 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

























3 is correct!


The ontological proof is called a priori because:

    { 1 } - it argues from cause to effect.
    { 2 } - it argues from the world to God.
    { 3 } - it argues from an idea that is gained before sense experience.
    { 4 } - it argues from sense experience.
    { 5 } - it argues from effect to cause.

<= back | menu | forward =>
Before continuing, you might try some wrong answers.
























 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

























4 is wrong. Please try again.


The ontological proof is called a priori because:

    { 1 } - it argues from cause to effect.
    { 2 } - it argues from the world to God.
    { 3 } - it argues from an idea that is gained before sense experience.
    { 4 } - it argues from sense experience.
    { 5 } - it argues from effect to cause.

No, it argues from an idea that is not found in sense experience.

<= back | menu | forward =>
























 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

























5 is wrong. Please try again.


The ontological proof is called a priori because:

    { 1 } - it argues from cause to effect.
    { 2 } - it argues from the world to God.
    { 3 } - it argues from an idea that is gained before sense experience.
    { 4 } - it argues from sense experience.
    { 5 } - it argues from effect to cause.

No, that would be an a posteriori argument because it argues from what comes afterwards, the effect, to that which came before, the cause.

<= back | menu | forward =>
























 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

























the end