Arguments for the existence of God through critical thinking and rationalization are
called ontological, cosmological, teleological, or pragmeatic arguments. The most widely known
of such arguments is that of St. Anselm from Proslogium of St. Anselm, which states that God is
considered a perfect being unlike humans or any other world subject. The fact that he is perfect
in a world of imperfection proves his existence. God is also the highest conceivable idea of
perfection, and therefore, if he were not to exist, there would have to be a higher form of
perfection that exists in reality.
An important critique of this is that Anselm argues that God is a perfect being which exists. However, can anything that exists be perfect?
…show more content…
Such a mover would have to be unmoved itself, and therefore not a part of this world. Herein comes the existence of God, a holy and unmovable force. Aquinas’ argument is contradicted by a previously learned concept called Ockham’s Razor, which focuses on the simplest reasoning without any assumptions. The text from Summa Theologica contradicts this by creating the idea of an eternal God to explain the universe. The simplest idea would be to believe that the universe is eternal itself, rather than creating an exterior being. The idea behind Ockham’s Razor is that the simplest answer is the most easily testable and most likely. Where did the idea of God creating the universe even begin? This concept is far more complex than simply the universe created itself. The famous William Paley has a different ontological argument within his text Natural Theology. The title of the reading gives insight to the theory, which focuses on something called natural design. The writing is based on an intricate and extensive analogy between the man made and the natural. For instance, Paley describes a man made watch in great detail. This intense detail sets the notion that each piece must have been put in place by someone, whom we can infer is a watchmaker. He then compares this to the intricacy of nature, which must have been made by a supreme diety. Such complexity could not have come about by chance. Only the most
William Paley found a watch on the ground and assumed that the watch was put together for a purpose. His arguments, then, lead towards the teleological argument, which starts from relatively specific observations to the crucial notion of purpose where there is an intelligent cause to the universe. Paley’s whole argument discusses how there must be a maker of the universe since there is a maker of the watch, which must be God. In contrast, a telescope has a designer, so an eye must also have a designer,
Man is the very proof that God exists. Because man is imbued with a thinking mind that realizes that he gets all his powers, best of all his thinking mind, from his idea of God, then it is impossible for man not to realize that what he perceives of God clearly and distinctly in his mind is a reality, and that reality is the existence of God, a perfect being who can never deceive because by His perfect Being, God is free of defects. God, as a perfect being, is incapable of fraud and deception, two things that are caused by defects. God's existence is manifested in the way man is able to use his thinking powers to accept his limitations, and at the same time realize that someone greater than man has endowed man with the powers to think and discern clearly and distinctly the idea of a Supreme Being.
He is the designer of the whole universe and is perfect in every way. God has numerous attributes that reveal to us his great character. God reveals these attributes through his word and his mighty
As a theologian and philosopher, Saint Anselm strove to prove the existence of God in reality. The bulk of his argument is found in Chapter II of Proslogium.
Anselm believed in a perfect being theology, and support for premise one resides within Anselm's Principle of God's Necessary Perfection (Marenbon 121). A being 'that which nothing greater can be conceived' is by definition the greatest being, or most perfect being, possible. He uses the idea that 'that which nothing greater can be conceived' exists in someone's mind as a starting point, and seeks to build upon this foundation to show that God necessarily exists in reality as well. If it could not be conceived in one's understanding, then as far as this argument is concerned, it couldn't be shown to exist in reality as well.
He thus argues that the universe must be directed by an external intelligent being, and that is God. Through his fifth way, Aquinas clearly demonstrates design qua regularity and thus, the existence of
The ontological argument made by Anselm was criticized by one of his contemporaries, a monk named Gaunilo, who said, that by Anselm 's reasoning, one could imagine a certain island, more perfect than any other island, tf this island can exist in the mind, then according to Anselm, it would necessarily exist in reality, for a 'perfect ' island would have this quality. But this is obviously false; we cannot make things exist merely by imagining them. Anselm replied, upholding his argument by saying that Guanilo is essentially comparing apples and oranges. An island is something that can be thought of not to exist, whereas the non-existence of "that than which a greater cannot be conceived is inconceivable," Only for God is it inconceivable
Anselm understood god and beings, not necessarily from a logical or materialistic point of view but from the revelation he received from his devotion to God. He thought that all things living were perfect within themselves and that was proof enough for a God. He rationalizes that if we imagine two identical objects one exists and the other did not, then the one which exist is more perfect (Roca and Schuh 150). He concludes that existence makes something perfect.
However, nothing can be imagined greater or more perfect than God. So therefore Anselm believes, God must exist in every possible world.
exists and his idea of what a perfect being is, such as God, then God exists.
An argument that attempts to prove the existence of God through abstract reasoning alone is known as the Ontological argument. The argument begins with a clear explanation of the concept of God. When people talk or think about "God" they usually think or say that he 's a "perfect being" meaning He is flawless, ideal
In the Prologion, Anselm argues that God exists, otherwise known as the ontological argument. Anselm believes that “there is no doubt that something than which a greater cannot be thought exists both in the understanding and in reality (Anselm, Proslogion, 7).” In other words, we cannot imagine something that is able to be greater than God; it would be a contradiction to think being greater than the greatest possible being that can be thought of. A number of philosophers do not agree with Anselm’s argument, such as Gaunilo, St. Thomas Aquinas, and Immanuel Kant. However, despite these arguments against him, Anselm’s argument is still valid.
Firstly, we shall focus on the Design (or to use its philosophically technical term, the teleological argument). There are numerous variants of the Design argument, however we shall be focusing on Paley’s version (reference 1) of this theory. Paley’s version of the Design argument is based upon the idea that by looking around at certain features of the world (for example an inanimate object like a rock or say a living creature like dolphin or a person like myself) and theorising that they are too complex and intricate to randomly just manifest. They must have been created by a higher, more intelligent power and thus, if this is accepted as being so, then this proves beyond doubt that God exists.
In the bible, it says that “Fools say in their hearts, "There is no God” (Psalms 14:1). Anselm's reflection to this has become known as the Ontological Argument. Anselm defines God by saying God is that “which nothing greater can be conceived.” One way to interpret this phrase is to define “God” as maximal perfection, i.e. the greatest possible being. Anselm justifies his argument by using the idea of a painter. When a painter first knows of what it is he or she wants to accomplish, they have it in their understanding but does not yet understand it to exist. They don’t understand it to exist because they have yet to construct their painting. He is trying to say that there is a difference between saying that something actually exists in my mind and saying that I believe that something actually exists. when you hear the word square, you picture a square, or when you hear the word circle, you picture a circle. Anselm argued when humans hear the word God, they think Supreme Being. When I hear the word “God,” I recognize a God that I know from my personal experiences, but I also know that this God of mine is also working through the lives of everyone, not just mine. He has an intimate oneness with all of us, even if we don’t recognize or know it. I don’t think the God I know of is worried about whether people are religious or not. I think this God is interested in exploring experience, through us.
I begin with the constructs of Anselm. The ontological, or a priori, argument was first expressed in 1070 by Anselm. He argued that because we have a notion of an all-perfect being "that than which nothing greater can be conceived" – It must be God. Anselm regarded God as a being one who enjoys all conceivable perfection. Yet if God "existed" only as an idea in our awareness, then God would be less perfect than if He in fact existed. Therefore God had to be greater than what our finite minds have ability to conceive so as not to contradict the definition of God.