My Philosophy : Critical Thinking

Anselm. St. Anselm argued that a perfect being is necessary for existence. His argument is even prior to nature. St. Anselm thought it was impossible for anyone to reason about God or God’s existence without already believing in him. St. Anselm started the Ontological Argument based upon the nature of being. The Ontological Argument states that God is “the greatest being conceivable”. Anselm also said that if we imagine two objects both identical, but one exists and the other does not, then the one that exist is more perfect. Perfection cannot be perfect.

Descartes’ ontological argument is an echo of the original ontological argument for the existence of God as proposed by St. Anselm in the 11th century. To illustrate the background of the ontological argument, Anselm’s argument works within a distinct framework of ontology that posits the existence of God as necessity by virtue of its definition. In other words, for the mind to conceive of an infinite, perfect God, ultimately implies that there must indeed be a perfect God that embodies existence, for perfection cannot merely exist as a mental phenomenon. God is, according to Anselm, self-evident in the mind. Criticisms to this argument can be found in Anselm’s contemporary, Gaunilo, who argues that such an argument can be used to - put

In Proslogion, Anselm argues God’s existence using what has come to be known as the ontological argument. Using the ontological argument, Anselm disproves “the fools” belief that there is no God. However, Anselm does not give enough backing to his arguments. This is particularly true in the fourth point, that it is conceivable that God exists in reality. Although I agree with Anselm, he gives no evidence to support why it is conceivable that God truly exists in reality. Anselm immediately goes from saying how it means more if something exists in reality and understanding than just in the understanding to immediately saying that the fool can conceive that God exists in reality. The

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 :

Anselm’s Ontological argument sets out to not only prove God’s existence, but to show that God’s existence is self-evident. Similar to other ontological arguments, it uses a priori knowledge to argue its validity, meaning that the propositions made are derived from internal reasoning instead of sense experience.

The argument of whether God does or doesn’t exist has been a popular philosophical topic and everyday topic around the world for many centuries. It is a very important concept that philosophers have been trying to grasp since the beginning of philosophy. Anselm and Hume both have arguments that give us reasons to believe whether God exists or doesn’t exist. In this paper, I will venture into Anselm’s ontological argument, Hume’s contra-ontological argument, and objections to both of these arguments.

The ontological argument was first formulated by St. Anselm in the 11th century. It argues the existence of God from a deductive and a priori stance. God is a being than which none greater can be conceived. This is the response given by St Anselm to the fool in the psalm who believed there was no God. St Anselm the Archbishop of Canterbury and of the Benedictine Order explained that for God to exist in the mind he would not be the greatest being. However were God to exist in the mind and reality this would make a being ‘than which none greater can be conceived’, this means God must exist.

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

Anselm’s conception of God is vital for his corpus, because he will rely on his stated ideas about God throughout all his other works. This doctrine of God, entailing the Trinity, is found within two of his works: Monologion and Proslogion. Conceived while at Bec,

He is not limited by time, as He is outside of it. Thus God must exist

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.

To begin with, while reading Anselm and Aquinas’ views on how God exists, these important philosophers spent much of their time looking and searching for the idea that God actually exists. Therefore, of course there would be some mishaps along the way and people would try to argue against their idea of God’s existence. In this paper will be explained the proof of God and of course some objections against them that will make you wonder. With Anselm 's ontological argument and Aquinas’ ways, we can use that to help prove God’s existence. It would be self-contradictory to deny that anything greater than the all perfect God exists.

In the book, The Proslogion, written by Saint Anselm, we find the Ontological Argument. This argument made by Saint Anselm gives us proofs that he believes helps prove the existence of God. Anselm gives many reasons as to why the simple understanding of God can help prove that God himself exists, as well as mentioning how the idea of God cannot be thought not to exist. Though this argument has been looked at by people such as Guanilo, a monk, whose response to Anselm 's proofs was trying to say that there were flaws, there are more reasons as to why Anselm 's proofs work well with his argument. From the understanding of God existing, and the idea behind greatness Anselm 's argument is one that is strong and can work as a proof when trying

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.

In the 11th century, French monk, Anselm of Canterbury wrote the Monologion in an attempt to demonstrate the existence and attributes of God by using reason alone. In his later work, Anselm tried to solidify the claims he made in the Monologion to make his final claim for the existence of God. That second work, the Proslogion contains his most famous proof for the existence of God. Beginning with what Anselm believed to be a fundamental idea of God, which is the belief, that God is some being of which nothing greater can be conceived. It is in Anselm’s assumption of what the universal definition of God is, where his fallacy lies. A fallacy is a flaw in reasoning that weakens the argument. Anselm exhibits a pre-determined conclusion that God exists through his definition of God, which is the foundation of his argument. Anselm’s contemporaries challenged his argument for the existence of God whereby Anselm further begged the question, adding characteristics to God’s definition in order to keep his argument sound. Philosophers such as Immanuel Kant have since disputed Anselm’s definition of God, a definition we cannot hold. Medieval thinkers have long stated that God is everywhere and God is nowhere, and that God possesses all names yet he cannot be named. If we cannot arrive at a definition of God or conceptualize God, then Anselm’s argument can’t only be correct within his own definition and bias, but it cannot be widely applied as a prove for the existence of God.