There have been an innumerable amount of arguments for the existence of God for hundreds of years. Some have become much more popular due to their merit, and their ability to stay relevant through changing times. Two arguments in particular that have been discussed for a very long time are the ontological and cosmological arguments. Each were proposed in the period of the high middle ages by members of the Roman Catholic Church. They each have been used extensively by many since their introduction.
God 's existence has been a continuous debate certainly for centuries. The issue of God 's existence is debatable because of the different kind of controversies that can be raised from an "Atheist as being the non-believer of God" and a "Theist who is the believer of God". An atheist can raise different objections on the order of the universe by claiming that the science is a reason behind the perfection of the universe. In Aquinas 's fifth argument, he claims that the order of the universe cannot be explained by chance, but only by design and purpose. To explain this order of the universe he concludes that, there is an intelligent being whom we call "God".
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.
As I become older, my doubts become larger, I started to question the existence of God and I had convinced myself that God does not really exist. Before I start my points in this argument, let me introduce myself to you. I am neither an atheist nor a Catholic, but a Born Again Christian. I have a religion, but at the same time doubt the existence of God. I do not totally refute the idea of God in our lives, but I really wonder if He exists and by the use of reasoning and evidences, I will present to you my stand about His existence.
What phrase does Anselm use to designate God? Explain why he formulates his designation in this way. Do you think this is an appropriate way to speak of God? The Phrase he used was “God is that than which no greater can be conceived”. There are two reasons as to why Anselm words this the way he does, reason one is the idea that “ no greater can be conceived” he doesn’t want you to be able to think about something greater hence the idea that no greater can be thought of by a person.
Philosophy 224 Monday/Wednesday 10-11:15 WORD COUNT In a small village, deep in the South American jungle of Guyana, two men overlook a massacre of over 900 people. Of these 900 people, about 300 were children. The men stand in silence, but only for a moment, they are philosophers… HUME: “This is truly astonishing… There is no way that Jim Jones could have been a prophet…”
Anselm’s “Ontological Argument” The general idea of the ontological argument is based on the notion that the concept of God as the greatest being implies that God exists—if not, there could be something greater, namely an existent greatest being—but this being would be God. The structure of the Ontological Argument can be outlined as follows (The argument is based on Anselm 's Proslogion 2): 1. We conceive of God as a being than which no greater can be conceived.
In this argument we already assumed that there may be possibility that God exist and finally we reached where we started. So this argument does not give us the exact information about existence of God. There are many objections on this argument but still it is a powerful argument. In my opinion, this argument is not much satisfactory. It describes that existence is greater than imagination.
God’s existence is not dependent on anything else because God existed before anybody else did. Humans would not exist if God did not exist. I also agree that a being that exists in the understanding and in reality is greater than just existing in only the understanding or reality because if a being does not exist in both places then it does not seem real. For example, if we did not have the bible and churches it would be hard for a lot of people to believe that God is real because we would only know the stories that has been shared by others that over the years could get misconstrued so, his existence would only be in the understanding, and that is why a being who exists in reality and the understanding is greater. I agree with mostly all of Anselm beliefs except for his belief that you cannot think of “nothing” at any time because you are always thinking of something.
God acts with purpose, as can be seen in the book of gensis and the Creation stories. Outside of Aquinas’ Five Ways to prove God’s existence, the most key arguments that Aquinas puts forth are due to the analogical way humans speak about God. The univocal and equivocal nature in which humans use theological language to describe God Himself is an essential component to understanding God’s existence. Neither univocal nor equivocal descriptions can truly encompass the analogous relationship humans have with
Since nothing can compare to God, the Deus Homo is the only relatively analogous solution. Saint Anselm’s presumption circulating the explanation of the Deus Homo is preferred over that of
The definition of God at such point of writing was "that greater than which can be conceived." In other words, something greater than you can imagine. When question wether Descartes himself is greater than he gives himself credit he concludes that he could add infinitely to his knowledge. He also says that sensing is not clear
In this essay, I will set out to prove that Thomas Aquinas’ First Cause Argument does not show that God exists and the conclusion that God exists does not follow from the premises of the first cause argument. I do think that the conclusion is valid and could be sound/or has the potential to be, but the premises fail to provide the basis upon which to reach such a conclusion. Hence, I will be raising some objections to the premises and will try to disprove any counter-arguments that could be raised in its defense. This would be done by examining Aquinas’ First Cause Argument and trying to disprove it whilst countering arguments in its defense.
The Archbishop developed this argument to disapprove the fool mentioned in Psalms 14:1 who says that God does not exists. Anselm argues that the position taken by this fool is self-contradictory. In the verse
St. Anselm and Descartes are known for presenting the first ontological arguments on the existence of God. The word ontological is a compound word derived from ‘ont’ which means exists or being and ‘–ology’ which means the study of. Even though Anselm and Descartes’ arguments differ slightly, they both stem from the same reasoning. Unlike the other two arguments on God’s existence (teleological and cosmological), the ontological argument does not seek to use any empirical evidence but rather concentrates on pure reason. The rationale behind this school of thought