ascertain the existence of God. Anselm’s argument is based on the fact that there is a specific concept of God. It establishes the existence of God as "that than which nothing greater can be conceived" (Roth, 1970, p.270). From Saint Anselm’s argument, it is apparent that Ontological Arguments are mostly deductive and a priori. These arguments intend to determine God’s existence mostly through logic and non-aligned to experience. Anselm’s argument is founded on the belief that God exists in the mind
break down Anselm’s ontological argument with a powerful criticism, and then defend Anselm’s position. Following that, I will analyze both positions critically and provide my own stand regarding Anselm’s argument. The problem with Anselm’s ontological argument provided by Rowe in his book is the problem of definition. Gaunilo noticed that the definition of God as “a being than which none greater is possible” is infallible, in the sense that, the definition itself would force God into existence whether
Does the Ontological Argument successfully show that God exists? Anselm 's ontological argument is a philosophical argument which aims to prove God 's existence. The ontological argument is an argument for God’s existence based on reason alone. According to this argument, there is no need to go out looking for physical evidence of God’s existence; we can work out that he exists just by thinking about it. (Anon., 2004) Anselm’s argument is a reductio argument, it seeks to demonstrate that a statement
defined as the argument that God, being described as the most great or perfect, must exist, since a God who exists is greater than a God who does not (Retrieved from http://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/oi/authority.20110803100250688). It belongs to the Philosophy of Religions and not Theology; there is a difference between Philosophy of Religion and Theology, even though they both take God and religion as their subject. Theology starts with assuming that God exists and aids in figuring out
three, Anselm attempts to prove the existence of God in his so-called ontological argument. He brings forth two arguments, which are quickly criticized by Gaunilo and many others. In this essay we will look at the soundness of Anselm’s argument and whether it is right to truly disregard them. Anselm begins his argument in proslogion two by stating that there is no greater being than God. This greatness does not necessarily mean large, but it entails that God is the most perfect conceivable being
it is better to exist in reality than understanding so it would be contradictory for God (conceptually the greatest being that can be conceived) to exist only in understanding. Therefore, God exists! The greatest flaw in this argument as pointed out by Gaunilo in his ‘Perfect Island’ argument, is it invites parody. He argued that it was possible to use the same form as the ontological argument to prove the existence of a perfect island; the island must exist otherwise it is possible to conceive of