Title: Whether God exists or not?
Name: Kapil Jayesh Pathak.
Roll Number: 13110076.
World Count:
Whether God Exists Or Not
About Ontological Argument by St. Anselm: According to Ontological Argument by St. Anselm, suppose we imagine an object or a being which is greater than anything what we can imagine, and we think that that being is only in our concepts, i.e., it does not present in reality, if all of sudden, a being we imagined comes in existence in our real life, that is the greatest thing that can happen in the world. But already we have imagined that nothing can be greater than the being we have imagined, so it contradicts our assumption that the being we imagined is only restricted to our thinking and not the real world. So fro, Ontological Argument by St. Anselm, we can conclude two possibilities mathematically,
• If A has every property that B has and also A is in reality but B is not in reality, then A is greater than B.
• If
…show more content…
This phrase means that the being about which we are talking, is more perfect in all aspects than anyone else. That being is the perfection at which one can reach maximum. As we understand an every property and every functionality of every object in the world, we can think about the perfection of that property of that object. So there should be the maximum limit to every property of that particular object. As every object we can see in our surrounding has some faults, that every object in our surrounding is not perfect in every single aspect, so as considering maximum possibility of the existence of God, ultimately there can be a single object, which is perfect in all aspects and to that being or object we can call as ‘God’. So basically argument by Si. Anselm says that if we can think of any particular property of any object then we can also think about the maximum perfection to that
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.
Philosophers have for long debated on the existence of a Supreme all powerful and all perfect God, Kant, and Anselm being among them. Where Anselm has supported the presence of God and all the attributes that regard to the Him, Kant has risen up with a counter argument. The interaction between the two, the philosophical objection raised by Kant, and what this means to the rest of mankind will be analyzed in this paper.
The main idea behind Anselm’s argument is that
considered a perfect being unlike humans or any other world subject. The fact that he is perfect
I have an idea of a perfect being; it must contain in reality all the
The ontological argument argues that if you understand what it means to talk about God, you will see His existence is necessarily true. Anselm defined God as 'that than which nothing greater can be conceived', hence God must exist. Anselm also believed that even
154). Anselm’s definition of God is that he is the ultimate cause of the universe. He is a being which is all-powerful, all-knowing and all-loving. To call something that is not an all-powerful God would be like calling a shape that does not have four sides a square. Perfection is also included in the definition of God since He is a perfect being in every conceivable way. This is the key idea behind the ontological argument. If something is perfect, then there could not possibly be anything out there which is better than God. Perfection is part of the concept of God, therefore we must think of God as a being that cannot be imagined to be better than He is. As Anselm said, God is “that than which no greater can be
This argument for God’s existence was developed by the twelfth century theologian and philosopher, Anselm. It is based on Anselm’s declaration that God is “that which nothing greater can be conceived.”
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.
The original Proslogion simplified key ideas from Anselm’s earlier work, Monologion. In his ontological argument, Anselm states, "If God exists only in thought, God could also be thought of as existing in reality as well, which is (a far) greater (thing)." Anselm believed in the existence of God and he also believe that because God exists, he is greater than a god who doesn’t (exist).
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
Now, based off of these proofs made by Anselm, he believes that since God is that which nothing
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.
Anselm in this case defines God as “a being than which nothing greater can be conceived” (Anselm 30). Ontological arguments tend to be a priori, which is an argument that utilizes thoughts as opposed to empirical evidence to prove validity. Anselm addresses the Atheist fool in an attempt to disprove him “since the fool has said in his heart, There is no God?”(Anselm, 30). Anselm stressed that it is obligatory to recognize God as a perfect being that cannot be improved upon, and if someone understands the concept of God, then God exists in that person’s understanding. It is greater to exist in reality than just simply the understanding. The fool understands the concept of God. Therefore the fool has God in his understanding. Suppose God exists only in the understanding of the fool and not in reality. We could then think of something exactly as it existed in the fools understanding but it can also exist in reality, and the being we conceived of would be greater than the being that exists in the fools understanding. Therefore God exists not only in the understanding of the fool but also in reality. By showing that God exists in reality as well as in the understanding, we see that it is imperative that we should believe in God and that it is indeed reasonable.