Critical Analysis Of Ontological Analynt And The Argument Against It

There have been various studies, predictions, and theories related to the evolution of the universe. It is an important topic that makes everyone wonder how it all started. It took centuries to finally come to a conclusion that the big bang was the start of the universe. The big bang theory took ages to become a valid model that was accepted by scientists. This model is so far, the most accepted model that validates all the discoveries of major cosmologists and astronomers such as Tycho Brahe, Nicholas Copernicus, Albert Einstein, and many more. The big bang was essentially the beginning of our galaxy including the sun, our eight planets and moons. The start of the big bang is unimaginable. It all started off as an extremely hot element that

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

The ontological argument by Anselm claims that the idea that God does not exist is just as absurd as the idea that a five-sided square does. According to the ontological argument, we can tell that the claim that God does not exist is false without having to look into it in any detail. By knowing what

In this paper, I will deliver a reconstruction of Anselm's Ontological argument for the existence of God, and its adequacy for the existence of the greatest conceivable being. I will establish this by proving that Anselm's premises are sound and that the deductive arguments follow through a valid conclusion.

The question of God’s existence has been an ongoing debate for centuries, however the answer cannot be determined for sure. Although there is more logical evidence that disproves the existence of God. Many arguments and theories have arisen from famous philosophers and scientists that take a position on the debate. People assume that the existence of evil and pain disproves the existence of God but the counterargument for this is that God is trying to challenge us. The teleological argument that states that there must be someone responsible for creating the universe since the world is so intricate and orderly, however this is derived from deductive reasoning and logic. Then there is the existence of the Big Bang theory where in which something

Anselm's argument supports beliefs in gods existence. Anselm had a thought that gods presences are provable, and the nature of gods being. The study of “being” is called ontology. Anselm states” The best possible thing we can imagine “alluding god. Additionally, in Anselm's words “God is that than which greater can be conceived.” This implies god must exist.The existence of one can only be found in two ways. Either fanciful or tangible. God is the best thing we can consider. Things can exist just in our creative impulses, or they can likewise exist. Things that exist are as a rule are constantly superior to things that exist in our creative impulses. On the off chance that god just existed just in our creative energy, he wouldn’t be the best

For nearly a thousand years, the ontological argument has captured the attention of philosophers. The ontological argument was revolutionary in its sequence from thought to reality. It was an argument that did not require any corresponding experiment in reality; it functioned without the necessity of empirical data. Despite flaws and problems found in some ontological arguments and the objections raised to those arguments, ontological arguments still provide a phenomenal vehicle for ontological discussion through St. Anselm’s original ideas and argument, objections raised, and revisions of previous arguments. The ontological argument still intrigues philosophers despite potential objections and flaws

An Ontological argument is one that uses reason to prove the existence of God instead of using observations. Similarly a cosmological argument makes conclusions from facts about the world to prove the existence of God. (Oppy) Dr. William Lane Craig’s cosmological argument of Kalam has many supporter and opponents on his argument of God existence. Dr. William Lane Craig is a Christian man born in 1949 in Illinois. He has studied philosophy and theology at many universities, holds a doctorate in both philosophy and theology, and has taught the subjects.

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

St. Anselm's Ontological Argument has remained one of the most widely-known arguments for a Christian God, as well as simply probably the most famous logical proof of all time, since its inception in the late 11th century. The economical proof uses deductive logic starting from basic given premises to lead the reader to what is meant to be the inevitable conclusion that God must, necessarily, exist. The argument's polished simplicity is both a point in favor and a problem, however, for it provides little explanation for its premises beyond what is to be assumed within the tight structural framework of Christian thought beneath which all medieval philosophy operated. Anselm's proof is a clever piece of logic, and an important one, but its

St. Anselm Ontological argument is known to be the most popular Ontological argument however, it is also known to be the most confusing of them all. When defining God Anselm stated "a being than which nothing greater can be thought." By saying this Anselm makes a very strong claim that

This concept of God’s existence is also led with the idea that God is a necessary being, a being that is not dependent of something greater in order to exist. If God relied on another being, like how a children rely on parents to conceive them, then this being called God is not God because it would be imperfect. Therefore, there must be another to call God that meets all the requirements for perfection. One of the first popular objections was created by Gaunilo of Marmoutiers. The premise and conclusion to Gaunilo’s argument is identical to Anselm’s argument except with the replacement of the word “God” with “the Lost island” and the word “being” with “island”. As simple as that, though Gaunilo’s argument is completely absurd, Gaunilo’s reductio ad absurdum also proves to be as deductively valid as Anselm’s argument. However, this “Lost Island” could in no way exist. The absurdity and validity of “the lost island” quickly brought up questions as to how Anselm’s Argument cannot be absurd. Anselm’s argument was not proven invalid until Immanuel Kant, a german philosopher during the 18th century, proposed an objection that would be the decisive blow to the Ontological argument (Immanuel Kant. Wiki). Kant’s

His first Ontological Argument for God’s Existence starts by defining God based on Christian belief as “a being than which nothing greater can be conceived.” It is on the foundation of this definition that he builds his argument.

Given these points, I believe Anselm’s argument is a logical way of looking at the existence of God, because the more knowledgeable we are about God; coupled with, a logical thought process of God, and the believe in our heart about God, we will have no other explanation for God.. It really is amazing how smart and advanced Anselm was in Christian Philosophy. While you will have some people who don’t agree with this argument, so there are many other methods to investigate God’s existence, for them to try out. On that same note, the important point is that we all conduct our own method of critical thinking and the evidence of God. While some need physical proof of God, though signs or physical evidence, but I believe somethings have not been

Saint Anselm created the “Ontological Argument”. Saint Anselm was the archbishop of Canterbury. The premise of Saint Anselm’s Ontological Argument is that, no greater being can be conceived than God. The Ontological Argument is an a priori or deductive argument. An a priori argument does not have to be supported by real or factual evidence just by reason without observation. Thus, the Ontological Argument is not reliant on an a posteriori premise. An a posteriori argument is an inductive argument and usually considered to be true because of past evidence or reasoning and rarely false. In “Core Questions in Philosophy” by Elliot Sober, Sober first discusses how Saint Anselm’s Ontological Argument agues the