More handpicked essays just for you.
St.anselm ontological argument essay
Ontological argument anselm
Anselm proslog essay on the existence of god
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
In Anselm’s Ontological Argument, he is trying to prove that God exists. He used two preconditions to prove this argument. The first precondition is the important idea of this argument, he said that because the greatest things not only exist in the mind, but it also exists in the reality. The second precondition is that there is nothing greater than God can be conceived. So the conclusion for this argument is that God exists. In this paper, I am going to critique the Anselm’s ontological arguments for God exists. I believe that his argument is based on concepts that he defined, and he used those concepts which he thought was true to prove that the God exists. In the book Proslogium, Anselm came up with the ontological argument in Chapter 2 and 3. In chapter 2, Anselm claimed that things can only exist in mind or in both mind and reality. Then he said that things that in both mind and reality will always greater than the things in mind alone. He used the painter as an example to convince people. He said that when a paint has been done by the painter, the painter will understand more than the paint only in imagination. And in chapter 2, the words showed that Anselm is a believer for God, he even called people who do not believe in God are fools. Then he claimed that God is the greatest. For Anselm, God is perfection, like he said in the book God, “than which nothing greater can be conceived”. At the end of the Chapter 3, he said that necessary existence is greater than contingent existence. From all those proofs, he got his finally answer that God has to exist. For the first precondition, Anselm first claimed that things can exist in the mind or both in mind and reality. Anselm thought that the greatest thing that can be conceived w... ... middle of paper ... ...s own rule that “nothing greater than God can be conceived” and used this assumption to make everyone believe that God exists. In conclusion, Anselm’s ontological argument is based on the concept analyze instead of the fact or experience. He uses the logical analysis for the concept of God, then he uses the concept of the God which he gives to people as the start point to prove God exists. In this argument, the biggest problem is that Anselm is a believer for God. Before he tries to prove God exists, deep in his mind, he already thought that God is existence. Then he can come up with some concepts that can only accepted by the Christians to prove that God exists. I think that for a Christian like Anselm, the ontological argument still a good example to prove that God exists. However, for people who do not believed in God, this argument is difficult to convince them.
To begin, Anselm’s ontological proof functions from the essence of God to God’s existence. The argument
This assignment is regarding the Philosophers Saint Anselm on Ontological argument and Saint Thomas Aquinas on Cosmological argument in the thirteenth century. Therefore, I will be researching their arguments consisting of our course book and the internet to find their similarities and differences in their views on God’s existence. I will express my feeling and views on both the philosophers the best possible way that I can. It has been a challenge for me trying to understand each of their views on demonstrating God’s existence.
The Ontological Argument, which argues from a definition of God’s being to his existence, is the first type of argument we are going to examine. Since this argument was founded by Saint Anslem, we will be examining his writings. Saint Anslem starts by defining God as an all-perfect being, or rather as a being containing all conceivable perfections. Now if in addition of possessing all conceivable perfections t...
Anselm begins by supposing that we, as functional human beings, can understand his definition of God. As Anselm himself puts it, even “when the fool [atheist] hears the words ‘something than which nothing greater can be conceived’, he understands what he hears.” This premise is intended to demonstrate the fact that when we conceptualize something (e.g. God), the thing that we are conceptualising exists in our underst...
Many philosophers, including Elliott Sober, have criticized Anselm for his reply to Gaunilo, as well as Gaunilo's attempt to show the Ontological Argument is not deductively valid. Gaunilo says that there must be something wrong with the argument, but he does not point out where the mistake is. It is necessary to do so because Anselm's argument does look valid. Indeed, Anselm says that the Ontological Argument is deductively valid because of the difference between God and an island. "This seems implausible, since deductive validity doesn't depend on an argument's subject matter, only on its form, and the two arguments have the same logical form" (87).
When Anselm attempts to prove the existence of God ontologically, he establishes a clear distinction between existence in understanding and reality. For something to exist in understanding, there must be a clearly defined concept for said object, however for it to exist in reality it must exist and understanding and also possess the quality of existence. Therefore, whenever one describes an object, they assume it exists and then continue to describe its attributes. However, if one assumes existence itself is a quality, it makes the presupposed existence of the described object either redundant or contradictory, depending on whether the object possesses the quality of existence. For instance, when one says "dragons do not exist" one assumes that dragons exists by mentioning them in conversation but then continue to disprove their existence. This sounds contradictory, however as far as we are aware, "dragons do not exist is a true
Over the years, there have been various interpretations given on what Descartes really meant in his ontological argument. However, most of given interpretations only examines the simple meaning of existence but Descartes arguments looks at existence in relation to the perfection of God. In short, what Descartes is claiming is that there is no any other way that he can examine the context of G...
Many theologies take/ give the existence of God a lot of importance due to their beliefs, and faith. However, some philosophers and theologians thought it is important that to demonstrate the existence of God to those who says that there is no God. The St. Anselm’s ontological Argument is a priori argument for the Existence of God. Anselm’s Ontological Argument had been known as the first Ontological Argument which had been proposed in 1078 by Anselm of Canterbury in his book Proslogion. Although Anselm didn’t gave his Ontological Argument a name immediately; however, the name Proslogium was given several centuries later by Kant. Anselm as a philosopher his aim on his ontological Argument is to refute the fools who say or who don’t believe in their heart there is a God. Anselm’s purposes on his argument are to prove that God’s exits by using philosophical logic and reason.
This argument was questioned by a monk named Gaunilo who challenged the premise that what exists in the mind, must also exist in reality (Oppy). Anselm responded to Gaunilo by creating a different aspect of the argument using the idea of God being a necessary being: his argument consisted of three things (Oppy). First, God is by definition, a necessary being. Second, existence is logically necessary to the concept of a necessary being (Oppy). Third, since God is a necessary being, he must exist (Oppy).
The Cartesian Ontological Argument can be formulated as follows: (1) God is that being than which nothing more perfect can be conceived upon. (2) Existence is a perfection. Therefore, (3) God exist.
Anselm argues, in effect, that the existence of God is built into the very concept of God. He proceeds by a form of argument called reductio ad absurdum -- reduction to absurdity. He attempts to show that the position of the fool -- the non-believer who has said in his heart, "There is no God" -- is incoherent and leads to absurdity. (Cottingham, 1996: 246)
Rene Descartes, a 17th century French philosopher believed that the origin of knowledge comes from within the mind, a single indisputable fact to build on that can be gained through individual reflection. His Discourse on Method (1637) and Meditations (1641) contain his important philosophical theories. Intending to extend mathematical method to all areas of human knowledge, Descartes discarded the authoritarian systems of the scholastic philosophers and began with universal doubt. Only one thing cannot be doubted: doubt itself. Therefore, the doubter must exist. This is the kernel of his famous assertion Cogito, ergo sum (I am thinking, therefore I am existing). From this certainty Descartes expanded knowledge, step by step, to admit the existence of God (as the first cause) and the reality of the physical world, which he held to be mechanistic and entirely divorced from the mind; the only connection between the two is the intervention of God.
ONTOLOGICAL ARGUMENTS God generally refers to one supreme, holy, personal being,. The divine unity of ultimate good-ness and of ultimate reality. St. Anselm of Canterbury developed what we have learned to be the ontological argument. He began his argument by saying that even a fool can grasp or understand the concept of "a being than of which nothing greater can be conceived." He continues to state that a fool would say that the concept of this being's existence is only in his mind and in the mind of others but not in reality. However he also admits to the possibility of this being existing in reality. Whatever is understood by the fool is argued that than which nothing is greater can be conceived cannot solely exist in the mind but also in reality, hence, God exists. (Angelfire) This personally sounds like a salesperson's pitch to confuse and conquer for a sale. Gaunilo felt the same. He frequently debated with St. Anselm on behalf of the fool. He stated that it was not possible to visualize the concept of this perfect being because one can only imagine an image when one has an idea of what that image is suppose to resemble.
St. Anselm, also known as Anselm of Canterbury, was born on 1033 and lived to 1109. He was a very earlier author of many philosophical works. St. Anselm provided proof that there was existence of a Supreme Being or God a lot earlier than many other philosophers even existed. St. Anselm was the creator of the argument called the ‘ontological argument’. This happened to be the shortest and cut to the chase argument based on the proof of God and his existence ever created. This ontological argument is based off of the idea of being, not directly on observation. Trying to proof the existence of a Supreme Being using this argument can be a little risky because Anselm never really mentions evidence that a Supreme Being is in existence. He implies that a Supreme Being is in your mind therefore then it is real. If you think the idea of God in your head then he is real no matter what. This is where a lot of philosophers would try to argue against Anselm to try and prove him wrong, but there is evidence he shares that has people to believe that there is a so-called Supreme Being. Anselm argues that if God exists in your thought then he will exist in reality. He shows how he is a firm believer in the “thought” of God. Anselm has the power to make us think logically about the existence ...
Anselm uses the definition of God (the ontological argument), in which I have described above, to prove God's existence. As I mentioned, Anselm believes that God is the greatest being we can possibly think of. He does this by first trying to prove the