Logical Vindications For The Existence Of God Essay

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.

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

So in the end, Thomas Aquinas and Rene Descartes both attempted to prove the existence of God, but they differ in respect to the different thought processes to obtain the existence of God. An still to this day both Philosophers are regarded as key factor in the world of philosophy and their arguments were so influential that they were able to land a spot in our textbook “THE GREAT CONVERSATION”. But thanks to these gentlemen and their contributions to their works were able

The argument begins with Anselm defining the term God as “that, than which nothing greater can be conceived” (pg.26). Although simple, once this term is accepted Anselm believes he has successfully proven the existence of God. This becomes clearer with further analysis. If God is a being that, than which nothing greater can be conceived, it naturally follows that God would possess all properties of greatness. An example of this would be omnipotence. Omnipotence would be such a property because it is greater to have ultimate power than to have limited power, therefore, God being the greatest conceivable being would possess the property of omnipotence. Likewise, it is greater for something to exist in both reality and the mind, than to exist only in the mind. Thus, just as omnipotence was ascribed to God so must the property of existence, for if God did not exist, he would be lacking a great making property, and consequently would be only a great being, but not the greatest conceivable being.

Does God exist? This question has been in debate for centuries with many opposing views, some arising from philosophers on the same side while others refute Gods existence altogether. However for this particular paper I will be taking the best explanations approach. What I mean by this is I do not have proof of God’s existence but the existence of God is the best explanation for the universe around me. With this statement in mind we will discuss arguments in support of God’s existence as well as philosopher H.J McCloskey’s article On Being an Atheist.

In Anselm’s The Ontological Argument, he analyzes the definition of god in his own version of the ontological argument. He claims that god cannot exist solely in the mind without also existing in reality. God is too great a being to be only understood in the mind without existing, which would make him less than great and contradict the understanding. By understanding God, we prove that he exists in reality, and cannot deny his existence, whether it be in the material world or in the

There have been debates whether God is exist since the beginning of time. Many people claim many different things. There say there are three models of ultimate reality: Materialism, Pantheism, Transcendence. Transcendence is the only Ultimate Reality. Transcendence is that there is a perfect being (God). He created the universe. He is not the universe. In Christianity we believe we die physically and when Jesus Christ returns we will be resurrected and join Him and God in the perfect Heaven. God has given us the Bible so that we know right from wrong.

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,

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

Ontological argument is based on mind and analysing the concept of God (2/3 however, cosmological argument is about causation and observation of the world. According to this argument’s believers everything that came to the world should have a cause that bring it to exist and that thing is God (davise 75). This essay will explain the ontological argument about existence of God from the Anselm and Descartes’s point of view as two of the most important supporters of this argument. This essay will also explain that this argument is a valid and sound argument. Ontological argument is a priori argument, which means unlike a posteriori arguments such as the cosmological argument about existence of God; it does not need any experimental evidence or the world observation to

Theologian and author Brian Davies in the first section of chapter five of his 2004 book An Introduction to the Philosophy of Religion, discusses the evidence that highlights the ideal of God’s existence through the Ontological Argument. Davies believes that some of these hold a good argument while others lack logical reasoning to conclusively state “therefore there must be a God.”

Many different philosophers have argued the existence of God in the form of ontological arguments. The first philosopher to make such argument is Saint Anselm of Canterbury. St. Anselm argued that God is “something than which nothing greater can be imagined” (Barnes). He believed that there was nothing in this world whose existence and understanding could be imagined to be greater than the existence of God and that even a fool would agree that there is something in this universe in which nothing can be greater than. Another philosopher who argued on the existence of god is Guanilo. Guanilo argued that if the greatest of something (he gave the argument of an island) can exist in the mind, then it must have to exist in reality. If there is something

Kant argued that Anselm’s argument defines existence as a property that objects can either contain or lack; to say an object exists is not to attribute existence to that object, but to sat that the concept of that object is exemplified [5]. Kant illustrates this through an analogy of gold coins; an idea of a pile of 100 coins that exist in intellectu (imaginary) and a pile of 100 coins that exist in re (reality) have the same worth [7]. This comparison certifies that due to existence not being a property of objects, then it is impossible to compare a God that exists to a God that does not. From Kant’s perspective, a God that exists and a God that does not are qualitatively identical, both instances of God’s actuality containing characteristics of omnipotence, omnipresent and omniscient - conflicting with Anselm’s statement that an existent God is greater than a non-existent God

Continuing off this idea of God being the greatest idea that can be thought, and how the thought of God is in everybody 's mind, Anselm mentions “ If that- than-which- a-greater-cannot -be-thought exists in the mind alone, this is the same than that- which- a- greater- can- be- thought is than that-which-a-greater-can-be-thought. Therefore there is absolutely no doubt that- than-which- a-greater-cannot -be-thought exists in both the mind and reality” (Anselm 88). This proof that is given to us by Anselm is helping to show that God is something that is an idea in everybody 's mind, but existing only in the mind is not enough. As said before Anselm states that no one can think of anything greater than God, but if God was something that was only an idea in people 's’ heads then there would be ways for people to think of things greater than God. Though if God existed outside of someone 's mind, in reality, then it would be impossible for anyone to think of anything bigger than God and because God is something in which nothing greater can be thought, he must exist in both the mind and reality.