Anselm’s argument is based on this known definition of the concept of God alone. Descartes’ argument for the existence of God is based on his foundation of knowledge, logic. Humans have the idea in their minds of infinite perfection. Humans also have the idea of themselves as inferior to this idea as imperfect. For humans to have the idea of infinite perfection, there must be truth in the reason for them having this idea.
Saint Anselm delivered the strongest ontological argument for God through conceptual analysis. The ontological argument is a deductive argument that is an analytical statement that can be constructed by definition(s). He argues that one thing is necessary to exist, and that thing is God. God is a necessary being. His argument is known as reductio ad absurdum, which demonstrates through a contradiction that God exists.
In John Locke’s, An Essay Concerning Human Understanding, Locke develops an argument for the existence of God. In the the following paper, I shall first reconstruct Lockes’ argument for his claim of God’s existence. I shall then identify what I take to be the weakest premise of the argument and explain why I find it in need of justification. The following is a reconstruction of Lockes’ argument: 1) Man has a clear perception of his own being 2)
Critical Analyses of St. Anselm’s argument for the Existence of God and Douglas Gasking’s argument for the Non-Existence of God. Arguments against St. Anselm’s Ontological Argument for the Existence of God St. Anselm begins with a definition of God, argues that an existent God is superior to a non-existent God and concludes that God must exist in reality, for his non-existence would contradict the definition of God itself. The argument does not seem plausible to an unbiased person, even at the very first reading. It seems as if not all aspects of the question under scrutiny have been considered.
When discussing the philosophy of God’s plausible existence, several well composed arguments are presented, from Anselm’s Ontological Argument based the definition of God, to the Teleolgical argument grounded in the idea that a complex creation demands an intelligent creator; additionally, many debate that there is no need for a rational explanation as we are required in the nature of belief to take ‘leap of a faith’ regarding the existence of God. While each side offers valuable insight into this dilemma, I would argue that neither fully proves the existence of an all-knowing, all-powerful and all-good God. However, as I will discuss in the rest of the paper, the Teleolgical Argument and Kierkengaard’s faith eliminates dread argument when combined can reasonably provide evidence for the existence of God.
In his essay "The Will to Believe" William James tells us that his purpose is to present "a justification of faith, a defense of our right to adopt a believing attitude in religious matters, in spite of the fact that our merely logical intellect may not have been coerced." Page2. I found his arguments also persuasive because he suggests the existence of God cannot be solve by our intellectual means. James argues that intellectual activity is motivated by two goals: to shun error and believe truth. The choice to believe or not is alive, forced and momentous.
Craig defends the Kalam by using two arguments. Argument one is as follows: Whatever begins to exist has a cause of existence; the universe began to exist; therefore: the universe has a cause. Argument two addresses the cause of existence more specifically and is as follows: Whatever begins to exist has a cause, the universe has a cause; if the universe has a cause, then an uncaused, personal creator of the universe exists.
Indeed, we have now gone through the first four Meditations. Descartes opinions have come a long way from the beginning. Everything he had previously believed has been destroyed via the method of doubt, and now all that he believes to be certain is that he exists and is a thinking thing, also that god is necessarily real. Although this paper only gave Descartes justification for the soul being a fundamental substance, he later goes on to justify the body as one
Ontological argument by St. Anselm in favour of God’s existence: The ontological argument of the existence of the God is entirely based upon the fact of contradicting the non-existence of God. The original statement on which St. Anselm’s ontological argument of God is based upon is that "God is that than which no greater can be conceived. " The statement means that there cannot be a being which can be greater than God and there cannot be a being which can be imagined greater than a God as God is treated as an ultimate perfect being that can be imagined. One of the prominent feature that God has is perfection i.e., something can’t be called a God unless it’s completely perfect.
His argument is one that requires multiple glances and a decomposition to its base components. It components being that we exist, we think clear and distinct thoughts that we affirm to be true even though other thoughts must be doubted, there must be a greater force that is responsible for these clear and distinct thoughts, and this greater force is an infinite, perfect, all-powerful God. While Descartes built a strong case about the existence of God, it is not completely perfect. There are still more questions that can be asked about his reasoning and certain holes in Descartes’ prior and succeeding meditations that raise the question of “How concrete and rigid is Descartes’ reasoning throughout his
Anselm was a Greek philosopher who was born in 1033 in Aosta, Italy. He was a Benedictine abbot in France who went into self-imposed exile to protest King William II of England and he was also a disciple of Augustine and he promoted a lot of Augustine’s teachings and beliefs. Anselm held the office of archbishop of Canterbury from 1093 to 1109, because in 1109 Anselm died. After his death in 1109 he was canonized as a saint, and his feast day is on April 21. Anselm believed that it was not possible to think of absolutely nothing.