Ontological Argument Essay

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 presence even more realistic. Anselm’s argument, therefore, provides the idea of God’s existence as reality

Premise number one is Anselm’s conception of God. Premise number two is a logical truth, again according to Anselm. Finally, premise number three simply follows from the previous two premises. In short, Anselm’s thinking behind his argument is “because a supreme being exists in the understanding, it must exist in reality.” He defends his argument by comparing a non-existent “something” with an existent “something”. An existent “something”, says Anselm, is greater than a non-existent “something”. If God were non-existent, then we could imagine a God greater than he, namely an

Descartes’s Ontological argument begins with the idea of that which is clearly and distinctly known must be true. Following from that, he states that because one clearly and distinctly perceives God as a being with all perfections and because existence is a perfection, God must exist. Further,

The nature of this question is pointing towards ontological arguments, these arguments claim that understanding God’s definition to be true can prove His existence. The proof used is a priori and this means that the propositions do no not require sense experience to be understood as true. The name ontological is taken from two Greek words, ‘ontos’ (being) and ‘logos’ (study of) which shows that the argument is concerned with the nature of God, and it is from His nature that His existence is argued for. In Proslogian, Anselm put forward his version of an ontological argument and his argument looks at having a definition for God that any person can believe, both the fool and the believer. I am going to argue against his argument as looking

If God exists as an idea, but not in reality, then we can imagine something greater than Him.

Whereas Anselm bases God as “something than which nothing greater can be thought,” relying on purely a definition, Descartes uses his theory of innate ideas and principle of definite and clear perception as grounds for the existence of God. To Descartes, God must exist simply because of his idea of a supreme perfect being. Though

In the Proslogion written by Anselm of Canterbury, Anselm gives his ontological argument of how God exists. This essay explains that Anselm’s argument of God’s existence works. In particular, I will show that Anselm’s ontological argument makes sense by showing that the statements that logically contribute to the existence of God.

The question of the existence of God has troubled mankind for thousands of years. Many philosophers and theologians have always searched for prove whether God exists. Many of them constructed valid arguments which support theist believes. The existence of God was once never denied, as His presence, His existence was evident in miracles and the people 's faith. But time and the advancement of modern science have called God and His very nature into question. The Perfect Being has become the source of much doubt and controversy. The faithful, believing people have become unsure. It seems that we will never find the answer to this question, but I think that we should take a look at one of the most famous arguments that prove the existence of God: Ontological Argument. It was made in the eleventh century by Anselm who was one of the most important Christian thinkers of his time. He proved that God exists by relying only on a priori reasoning. We do not need any physical evidence of God to prove that he exist. We can prove it just by our ability to thinking about it.

The Ontological Argument for the existence of God is an a priori argument that aims to demonstrate that God’s real-world existence follows necessarily from the concept of God. In Meditation V of Discourse on Methods and Meditations on First Philosophy, Descartes presents his version of the Ontological Argument for the existence of God. In this essay, I will argue that this argument fails because necessary existence for a concept does not entail its real world existence.

In his Proslogion, written in 1077-1078, St. Anselm of Canterbury, introduced the first formulation of his ontological proof for the existence of God. In an effort to gain a deeper knowledge and acquaintance with his creator, Anselm set out to logically deduce God’s existence from the very definition of God. In the Proslogion he writes, “God is that which a greater cannot be thought. Whoever understands this properly, understands that this being exists in such a way that he cannot, even in thought, fail to exist” (Anselm, 101). Anselm uses this definition as the fundamental argument for his proof of God’s existence. He argues that if the “fool” or disbeliever denies the existence of God, he is still capable of understanding the definition of God, thereby God exists in his mind as a mental image but not necessarily in reality. However, since the very definition of God is “that which a greater cannot be thought” and surely what exists both mentally and in reality must be greater than what exists only mentally, then God’s existence in the fool’s thoughts must inevitably imply his existence in reality, as well. If that’s not true, than the thought the fool has cannot be of God, since if that thought only exists mentally then there must be something greater than it is and that goes against Anselm’s definition. Ultimately, according to Anselm’s definition, it would be self-contradictory to deny the existence of such a being.

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).

Anselm begins by explaining that the notion of God is that he is a being of which no greater could be possible thought of.We know that existence is conceivable and that it is ideal ( better ) to exist than to not, so the rational conclusion should be that God does indeed exist.

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

As mentioned before, Anselm comes with two proofs for the existence of God and we will start with the first proof. The first proof begins with Anselm's definition of God which is that than which nothing great can be thought. The definition is saying that God

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.