More handpicked essays just for you.
Three arguments for the existence of god
Arguements for the existence of God
An essay on the traditional arguments for the existence of god
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
In the following I intend to prove that the ontological argument is in and of itself, insufficient in proving that God exists. There are a few problems with the argument that I will be discussing in detail in an attempt to illustrate exactly why ‘The Ontological Argument’ is unsatisfactory.
The Definition of ‘Greater’
St. Anselm of Canterbury defined God as “that-than-which-a-greater-cannot-be-thought” (Bailey, 2002). The problem with this definition is that the term ‘greater’ is surely up for interpretation. The term ‘greater’ requires a comparison between itself and one or more things, which could pose a problem for Anselm’s argument; however Professor Thorp states that the only difference between these two things is that one exists in the mind, while the other exists in the mind and in reality. If we understand that a God that exists in the mind and in reality is greater than one that merely exists in the mind then we must understand that God exists. We need to examine this, however, much more closely to discover the problem with this statement; and I will do so using an example given to us by Professor Thorp.
During the discussion of the Ontological argument, the professor asked us whether we would prefer ‘a real beer’ on a hot day, or ‘an imaginary beer’. The real one is preferable and it is greater than the imaginary one. But what type of beer was each person in the class imagining? There are multiple brands of beer available and it is quite possible that many people throughout the room were picturing a different beer. Which real beer was greater? This is not a question that I can answer because it lies in a matter of preference.
We experience a similar problem when we think of ‘a real God’, and ‘an imaginary God’. Perhaps I perceive God in a specific way, and to me, he is a being “that-than-which-none-greater-can-be-thought” (Bailey, 2002). This proves that my perception of God exists for me, but what of everyone else’s perceptions of God? We must recognize a problem with this, in that everyone may perceive a ‘greater’ God in a very different way. We know that there are different perceptions of the ‘greater’ God because we have evidence of it in the various religions and the contrasting views of their God. With this in mind, all Anselm is able to prove with his argument is that every person’s individual perception of God does exist, but no on...
... middle of paper ...
...comprehend or imagine Him. Because of this, God cannot be ‘thought’, he can merely be defined as infinite. Since we cannot comprehend God in our thought, he no longer exists in our minds as an entity, but merely as a definition. Thus, since he no longer exists in our minds, there is no obligation to understand that he must exist in reality; an implication made in Anselm’s argument.
Anselm’s Ontological argument is insufficient in proving that God exists. For the reasons above and further objections from various philosophers, I do not believe that Anselm can argue the existence of God with his current premises as they stand. I must say that despite my objections to Anselm’s Ontological argument, I respect his work done, and the tremendous thought process that must have occurred to conjure up such a case as was presented. It is definitely much easier to prove a mortal wrong than it is to prove the existence of something so great and so unknown. Anselm’s Ontological argument while intriguing does have some problems in my opinion that take away from its validity; but needless to say it is in and of itself quite astounding.
...nd since from what we know we can imagine things, the fact that we can imagine an infinite, transcendent, omnipresent, omniscient, omnipotent God is proof that He exists, since what can me thought of is real and can be known.” (ch. 2) Saint Thomas Aquinas' rebutting reply would be that it is simply not so, not everything can be known to mortal man and not all that is real is directly evident to us as mankind.
To begin, Anselm’s ontological proof functions from the essence of God to God’s existence. The argument
Although explicated on many occasions and by many different authors, the teleological argument for the existence of God provides the best springboard from which to launch contemporary convictions of faith. In the revised edition of his earlier The Existence of God, Richard Swinburne constructs a solid outline that reveals the exact structure of the teleological argument. He presents both forms of the teleological argument , holds each under the light of skeptical review and then provides insight and defense that allows for careful philosophical review.
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...
The Ontological argument was presented in his work “Proslogion” in two parts. It should be noted that this entire argument was formed from reason which is the process of forming conclusions and judgements through logic. As a result, a prior (first hand) knowledge is used. The first part is focused on proving God’s existence.
The Ontological Argument sets out to prove the existence of God, as defined by Anselm as ‘something than which nothing greater can be conceived’. Without this carefully phrased definition, there would be no argument, as the argument’s leap from imagination to reality occurs here, i.e. from God in the imagination to God in reality. This ‘leap’, or crossover, as presented in Anselm’s reductio ad absurdum argument, is where this essay will focus on most in raising possible objections and identifying any fallacies in the argument.
In the Proslogion, Anselm tries to prove the existence of God and his powers through the ontological argument. This argument redirects the argument of God’s existence from science and observation to logic, where Anselm explains that there has to be a being that nothing greater can be thought of, and that is God. One of Anselm’s main topics of contention is God’s omnipotence and whether He is actually infinite. In the Proslogion, Anselm talks about God’s omnipotence and if it can be disavowed because of self-contradictory statements, how God’s non-action gives him more possibility and power, and how being all-powerful can lead to God being both merciful and yet not feel the pains of sinners.
Anselm’s classical ontological argument is criticized precisely for its attempt to define God into existence. The argument is deductive and its form known as reduction ad absurdum. “That is, it begins with a supposition S (suppose that the greatest conceivable being exist in the mind alone) that is contradictory to what one desires to prove” (Pojman 41). In other words, the argument attempts to show a contradiction or absurdity in the opposite view in order to claim his own view is correct.
In chapter three there is a somewhat disparate side of the ontological argument. It centers on the nature of God than the meaning of him. Particularly, this chapter centers on the early quality of God that is the fact that he needs to exist. Inanimate things, supplementary living things, and humans are ...
To defend the lord’s existence, he begins by presenting the argument that God is “something that than which nothing greater can be though” (432). This is apparent as God trumps all things that exist in this world as He is the creator therefore, the greatest of all. Certainly, if He is greater than what can be thought, then for the same reason He must
The Proof of the Existence of God There are many arguments that try to prove the existence of God. In this essay I will look at the ontological argument, the cosmological. argument, empirical arguments such as the avoidance of error and the argument from the design of the. There are many criticisms of each of these that would say the existence of God can’t be proven that are perhaps.
St. Francis of Assisi was born in Umbria in the year 1182. He was a child every father hoped for, he was filled with life, a determined and courageous individual. He was gifted with rather good looks, qualities that attracted friends and a gift of leadership. His father was an extremely wealthy merchant in Assisi. But this son, his favourite, was the one who broke Peter Bernardone’s heart. The boy turned on his father, and in a vicious event that eventually resulted into a public scene. St. Francis of Assisi stepped away from his father, his business and left his father in a state of immense emotional suffering.
Another way that St. Anselm's argument differs from other arguments is that it requires that you look at a definition of the concept of God. As Sober says, the definition of an object does not, in itself, prove its existence. Some examples he gives are unicorns and golden...
The Ontological Argument for the Existence of God The ontological argument is an a priori argument. The arguments attempt to prove God's existence from the meaning of the word God. The ontological argument was introduced by Anselm of Canterbury in his book Proslogion. Anselm's classical argument was based on two principals and the two most involved in this is St Anselm of Canterbury as previously mentioned and Rene Descartes.
Francis of Assisi lived about eight hundred years ago. He was born in the city of Assisi, Italy, in 1182. He was the son of Piero of Bernadone, who was a wealthy merchant. He received a education and seemed to follow his father's footsteps as a wealthy merchant. In 1201 he took part in an attack on Perugia, was taken hostage, and remained a captive there for a year. After his release, Francis joined the army but couldn't complete his time because he got sick. This period of time would change his life forever. During his sickness, Francis would spend hours meditating on the Lord in an old church, and he felt God drawing near to him. Some people come to Jesus with a memorable experience, but others come to Christ through a process. Francis' conversion wasn't an overnight experience, but it was definitely real.