Classical Argument Essay

ABSTRACT: Charles S. Peirce sketches "a nest of three arguments for the Reality of God" in his article "A Neglected Argument for the Reality of God." I provide careful analysis and explication of Peirce's argument, along with consideration of some objections. I argue that (1) there are significant differences between Peirce's neglected argument and the traditional arguments for God's existence; (2) Peirce's analysis of the neglected argument into three arguments is misleading; (3) there are two distinct levels of argument that Peirce does not recognize; and (4) it is doubtful whether the argument meets all the criteria set by Peirce himself.

The debate of the existence of God had been active since before the first philosopher has pondered the question. Anselm’s Ontological Argument was introduced during the 11th century and had stood deductively valid until the 18th century. Then there are the arguments to aim disprove God, such as the Argument from Evil.

Arguments for God are quite extensive, having taken many different forms throughout history and Anselm’s Ontological argument stands as one of the most famous. Anselm’s argument begins with the concept of God and, by using only a priori principles, attempts to establish the existence of God. His specific Argument goes as follows: That than which nothing greater can be conceived (God) exists in understanding, things are greater in reality than in understanding, therefore that than which nothing greater can be conceived must exist in reality. Anselm’s argument fails in two ways Anselm falsely assumes that the God he proves, to exist, is supremely unique and the second assumption that existence is a quality that things can possess.

Based on Gaunilos criticism the mere idea if something does not guarantee the existence. However, the existence of god depends on the interpretation of each individual person. “For Anselm, the issue is that the internal consistency of faith, not its capacity demonstrates its ideas in the public arena” (pg. 15).

I will begin my paper by discussing the two major versions of the ontological argument by Anselm presented in the proslogion. The first being “Possible and actual existence”, and the second being “Contingent or Necessary”. One should start off with the first summarized in the standard form as follows: #1 It is a conceptual truth that God is a being than which none greater can be imagined. #2 God exists as an idea in the mind. #3 A being that exists as an idea in the mind and in reality is, other things being equal, greater than a being that exists only as an idea in the mind. #4 Thus, if God exists only as an idea in the mind, then we can imagine something that is greater than God. #5 But we cannot imagine something that is greater than

A standout amongst the most interesting contentions for the presence of an all-impeccable God is the ontological contention. While there are a few distinct renditions of the contention, all indicate to demonstrate that it is self-conflicting to deny that there exists a biggest conceivable being. In this way, on this general line of contention, it is an essential truth that such a being exists; and this being is the Divine force of conventional Western belief in higher powers. This article clarifies and assesses great and contemporary forms of the ontological contention.

Without justification, arguments for God are shrouded with problems. For example, in the essay Belief without Argument, Alvin Plantinga argues for a weak foundationalism, which claims that God is a basic belief. A basic belief is the foundation of all knowledge and does not need proof. He is a Calvinist that believes God is a self-evident basic belief that is infallible. With God as the basic belief, all human knowledge rests on this infallible foundation. Michael Martin raises issues with Plantinga’s claim by demonstrating that an infallible basic belief can be ambiguous. In contrast, a community of individuals who hold that the catholic God is a basic belief may be in conflict with another community that claims that the Devil is a basic belief. Consequently, since Plantinga’s basic belief is infallible, it clashes with other beliefs in an epistemic relativistic fashion. An interchangeable infallible basic belief demonstrates that arguments for God need to justified through argument and evidence. It is important to incorporate rational understanding when contemplating on a deity because claims of infallibility are dangerous. Moreover, a basic belief with many communities in conflict raises many epistemic issues that defy

The proofs of God’s existence offered follow a logical sequence with the aim to convince the reader to believe. However, these proofs, at some stage, all offer a presupposition which flaws the author’s argument. These presuppositions are harmful because if the assumption can be disproven then the remainder of the argument collapses. Thus, the proofs of God’s existence are not compelling because they are all based on flawed presuppositions.

St. Anselm begins his argument by saying that God is the one that grant the ability of understanding to faith, in which an understanding insofar that has been very beneficial to him. He added that an understanding which he believes God is in fact what he believes to be. Thus, with that understanding leads to the rationale of the notion of something greater to be thought exist is an unconscionable. Anselm’s argument stresses the perspectives which to purport by presenting to those who deny the existence of God as the greatest being is self-contradictory. Therefore, the point of his argument, it is essentially crucial to realized that such a being exist. The “ontological argument by St. Anselm “is the most compelling and fascinating argument

In this article we will discuss God, and the arguments of his existence. We will argue

In the essay “Reminders of Poverty, Soon Forgotten” the author Alexander Keyssar uses classical principles of argumentation. He uses ethos, which is the character of the speaker; he uses logos, which is an appeal based on logic or reason; and he uses pathos, which is an appeal based on emotions. His piece is over poverty and what came from Hurricane Katrina and the aftermath for the people. He also discusses what other events in history have contributed to poverty, and how nothing is being done about it by the government.

The statement, "While historians agree that the Renaissance was a transitional period in the intellectual development of European society, they tend to disagree about the significance this period had on the way theorists viewed the world,” indirectly talks about two popular viewpoints of historians, specifically Jacob Burckhardt and Peter Burke. Burckhardt, an 1800s historian, would agree that the Renaissance was an explosion of European discovery and art, and the change itself was extraordinary and had no connections to the past. On the opposing side, Burke, a historian born 40 years after the death of Burckhardt, would argue that instead of new wave of intellect, the Renaissance was truly a period of increased stability that allowed for the

The idea of God has been one of the most debatable issues since the dawn of humanity and with it guided as well as deluded most lives in the pursuit for the truth. The impacts springing from the notion of God has from time memorial changed history, inspired more poetry and music including philosophy more than anything else, imagined or real. Peter Kreft once concluded that “The idea of God is either a fact, like sand, or a fantasy like Santa” (Lawhead, p. 334). Over the cause of time, different arguments have surfaced within and without the philoshophical boundaries in an attempt to either explain the reality of the non-existence of a God. A few of these claims include the, cosmological argument, the teleological argument and the problem of evil. However, although both arguments are insufficiently conclusive in their arguments about God, the cosmological argument seems to speaker quite louder than the rest and thus forms the basis of this paper: it generates the conclusion that God exists based on fundamental considerations about the cause of the world and why there is something rather than nothing.

The Existence of God In this essay I am going to explore and analyse arguments concerning the existence of God. I will be investigating all the different beliefs about God from Christians including: 'Moral and Divine Command', 'Ontological', 'Cosmological' and the argument from design. These areas of belief will all be fully considered and analysed in depth.

Addressing the question of whether we are born with innate ideas or that we are born tabula rasa in which we gain ideas through our senses, we look into Locke's understanding of both. Locke states that “No proposition can be said to be in the mind, which it never yet knew, which it was never yet conscious of.” (I.II.5) which is to say that a mind cannot register an idea innately given that it isn't even conscious of it. Thus, there is not one innate idea in which is universal to everyone the instance they are born, furthermore, there is no truth that every human can assent to. Yet, to state that all ideas derive from senses would be inaccurate as the argument that counteracts Locke beliefs are written as such