Gaunilo's Ontological Argument

924 Words4 Pages
1. Present the strongest version of the ontological argument that you can. Explain either Gaunilo’s or Kant’s objection to the ontological argument. How is that objection supposed to work? 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. Anselm delivered the first known ontological argument in a prayer. He claimed, 1) God exists in the understanding, 2) good might have existed in reality, 3) if something exists only in the understanding, then it is possible for it to be greater, 4) suppose God exists only in the understanding, 5) God might have been greater than it is, and 6) the greatest possible being could have been greater. There is a contradiction between #4 and #6. Guanilo counters Anselm’s argument by demonstrating that one could substitute different words with God and make absurd claims. For instance, he substitutes God for…show more content…
The first part of the argument demonstrates that infinity does not exist. The present would not exist because we could never reach an exact point in infinity. This displays the fact that the universe had a beginning. Current scientific theories show that the universe had a beginning 14.5 billion years ago. The second part of the argument claims that time started with the beginning of the universe. Therefore, God is not a part of time and is not a temporal being. The Kalam argument differs from Aquinas’s argument because it deals with the problem of a non-temporal being who simultaneously creates the universe and time. The Kalam argument deals with time, empirical data, and
Open Document