Anselm's Ontological Argument

-          I can imagine myself as a thinking thing existing apart from the body (as shown by the different essences in the argument from essence.).

I was exposed to religion as a child but it didn’t really truly connect with me at first. I have grown up catholic because that is the way my family preaches. I was taught to know to always go to church on Sunday’s and holy days of obligation, if you sin deeply you need to go to confess and the list goes on. Although, as I got older I began the true meaning of God being the greatest being and I started to have my very own religious experiences which raised a lot of questions in me. This now brings me to the argument that I’m going to talk about, The ontological argument.

To begin with, Anselm introduces the Ontological argument as a viral component of the religious aspect of mankind. The presence of a God should not be debated. He portrays this God as an all perfect being that represents the divine concept. He argues that no being is greater than God whether imagined or perceived by the human mind. From the human perspective of divinity, God’s existence is merely an idea of the mind. Even though man’s imagination can present an even higher being than God, it fails to make sense in philosophical principles since it is contradictory. Also, the existence of God can be conceptualized. This means that the senses of man are enough to act as proof of the presence of a being higher and more powerful than him. Philosophy allows for proof to be logical and factual as well as imaginative. From this point, the objection to an idea or imagination such as the existence of God makes his

Anselm’s Ontological Argument argues for the existence of an all-perfect God. The Ontological Argument assumes that Existence is a great making property. Critiques of Anselm and his version of the Ontological Argument argue that existence is not a great making property. If the critics are correct, they have completely bested Anselm, and destroyed his argument. In this essay, I will argue on behalf of Anselm’s argument and defend existence as a great making property.

In Chapter 2 of Anselm's Proslogian, Anselm offers what was later to be characterized as his Ontological Argument, which is an argument for God's existence he felt was so strong that even a fool as is said in Psalms 14:1- "who has said in his heart, 'There is no God'". Anselm's argument is as follows :

Rene Descartes also put forward ontological arguments, in one of these ontological arguments in favor of God, he claims that if he can think of an idea, and everything that idea entails that can be clearly and distinctly perceived to belong to that idea really does belong to it, then it’s the beginning of an argument that can be used to prove God. The idea of God is one that he holds within him just as certainly as he holds the idea of shapes or numbers; it is also a part of his understanding that the quality of existence can be attributed to God’s nature just as clearly as any property can be attributed to a number or shapes nature. A triangle can be proven as real because it’s a conceptual truth; a triangle has three sides and the total internal angle of its corners always add up to

If you were to deny the existence of such a being, that would mean that it would no longer be "that than which nothing greater can be thought". The analytic and synthetic distinctions were developed by Hume

(P6) The existence of the universe does not result from an infinite series of events.

In his ontological argument, St. Anselm aims to “refute the fool who says in his heart that there is no God” . This ‘fool’ has two important features: 1) he understands the claims that God exists and 2) he does not believe that God exists. Anselm works to show that this combination of features is unstable. Therefore, in his ontological argument, Anselm argues the following: 1) God is that than which no greater can be conceived, 2) if God is that than which no greater can be conceived then there is nothing greater than God that can be imagine; therefore: 3) there is nothing greater than God that can be imagined, 4) if God does not exists then there is something greater than God that can be imagined; therefore: 5) God exists . In this paper,

The argument claims that everything that begins to exist has a

Anselm of Canterbury ontological argument is a priori argument for the existence of God, which unlike other arguments attempts to show the existence of God based only on reason. It claims that the understanding the meaning of God, then the conclusion is that God exist. Anselm demonstrated that even a person who denies God’s existence means God does exist. Even atheist claim that God does not exist meant to acknowledge he knows that there is a supreme being and would agree that by even by not saying God, he means that being which nothing greater can be conceived. As discussed in class, I got a better understanding of the two words which applies in the Anselm ontological argument namely necessary and contingent.

In Anselm’s argument, necessary existence means that the existence of something is not dependent on any other being. For God to have necessary existence, then his existence is not dependent on anything. In nature, almost every living being is dependent on something – such as a parent. Thus, making God the only being to have necessary existence.

The Ontological argument is an a priori deductive argument. That is, an argument relating to being, that is independent of prior knowledge of the subject and with a conclusion you must accept IF one accepts the preceding premises. St. Anselm of Canterbury presents the Ontological

The belief of a greater perfect being is what brings forth this argument. This idea is seen in most religions all over the world, the existence of God , except in atheism which denies the existence of a supreme being. As proof, I bring forth Descartes claim in the Fifth Meditation in which he demonstrates the existence of God from the idea of a supremely perfect being. He explains further the contradiction in believing in a supremely perfect being who lacks existence as believing in a triangle whose interior angles do not add up to 189 degrees. He

Even an infinite chain of contingent beings might not have existed and therefore does not explain for the existence of the world.