<–2/”>a >Ontological arguments are arguments, for the conclusion that God exists, from premises which are supposed to derive from some source other than observation of the world—e.g., from reason alone. In other words, ontological arguments are arguments from what are typically alleged to be none but analytic, a priori and necessary premises to the conclusion that God exists.
St. Anselm, the Archbishop of Canterbury, made a fair share in the long list of proofs for proving the existence of God. He made an argument wherein it completely relies on one’s understanding of God to prove its actual existence; this is popularly known as the Ontological Argument
St. Anselm, in his Proslogion, unknowingly formulated what appear to be two arguments. It was not clear to him that the first argument he laid down was completely different from the 2 second argument, for he had seen it merely as an elaboration of the first one. “However, most philosophers today think that he stumbled on a completely different, and perhaps, stronger line of reasoning”.
The two arguments begin with the same initial premises but takes a different direction as it goes further. The first argument “purports to prove, simply from the concept of God as the supreme being, that God’s existence cannot rationally be doubted by anyone having such a concept of Him.”
The second argument “makes the stronger claim that God exists necessarily, or in other words, God possesses a kind of existence that is possessed by no other thing.
The first argument goes like this: I have an idea of God. This idea of God is the idea of a being that is the greatest that can be conceived. A being is greater if it exists in reality than if it exists only in the understanding alone. If God, who is the greatest conceivable being, exists in 3 the understanding alone, then a greater being that exists in reality can be conceived. But this is a contradiction. It is absurd to conceive of a being which is greater than the greatest conceivable being.
According to second argument-God, the greatest possible being, is the one whose existence does not depend on anything else. This implies that God “cannot begin to exist and cease to exist” (Lawhead 2007, 9) and also, God does not just happen to exist but exists necessarily. Therefore, God exists and “thou canst not be conceived not to exist; and rightly. For if a mind could conceive of a being better than thee, the creature would rise above the Creator; and this is most absurd.
In brief the argument can be explained as –
Anselm’s Ontological Argument
(1) God is that than which no greater can be conceived.
(2) If God is that than which no greater can be conceived then there is nothing greater than God that can be imagined.
Therefore:
(3) There is nothing greater than God that can be imagined.
(4) If God does not exist then there is something greater than God that can be imagined.
Therefore:
(5) God exists.
The first premise of this argument, (1), is Anselm’s conception of God. (2) is a simple logical truth; if God is the greatest conceivable being then there is no greater conceivable being. (3) follows simply from (1) and (2).
Anselm argues in support of (4) by comparing a non-existent God with an existent God. An existent God, says Anselm, is greater than a non-existent God. If God were non-existent, therefore, then we could imagine a God greater than he, namely an existent God.
(5) follows simply from (3) and (4).
,
Saint Anselm of Canterbury was an Italian-born Benedictine monk, philosopher, and theologian who lived from 1033 to 1109. He is considered one of the most important figures in medieval philosophy and theology. Anselm is best known for his ontological argument for the existence of God, which is one of the most famous and controversial arguments for the existence of God in the history of philosophy.
The ontological argument is an argument for the existence of God that is based on the concept of God as a perfect being. Anselm argues that if God is a perfect being, then God must exist. This is because existence is a perfection, and a perfect being would have all perfections.
Anselm’s ontological argument has been criticized by many philosophers, but it has also been defended by others. The argument is complex and difficult to understand, and there is no easy way to resolve the debate over its validity.
The ontological argument is a deductive argument. This means that it starts with a premise and then uses that premise to reach a conclusion. The premise of the ontological argument is the definition of God as a perfect being. The conclusion of the argument is that God exists.
Anselm argues that if God is a perfect being, then God must exist. This is because existence is a perfection, and a perfect being would have all perfections. Anselm writes:
“And certainly that than which nothing greater can be conceived cannot be conceived not to exist. For if it could be conceived not to exist, then it could be conceived to be greater than it is if it existed. But this is impossible. Therefore, that than which nothing greater can be conceived exists necessarily.”
Anselm’s argument has been criticized by many philosophers. One of the most famous criticisms is the objection that the argument is circular. This objection is based on the fact that Anselm’s argument relies on the definition of God as a perfect being. The definition of God as a perfect being is what makes the conclusion of the argument seem plausible. However, if the definition of God is circular, then the argument is not valid.
Another criticism of Anselm’s argument is that it is based on a misunderstanding of the concept of existence. The objection is based on the fact that existence is not a property. This means that it is not something that can be added to or subtracted from a being. Therefore, it is not possible to say that God exists because God is a perfect being.
Despite the criticisms, Anselm’s ontological argument remains one of the most famous and controversial arguments for the existence of God in the history of philosophy. The argument is complex and difficult to understand, but it has also been defended by many philosophers. There is no easy way to resolve the debate over its validity.
In conclusion, Anselm’s ontological argument is a complex and controversial argument for the existence of God. The argument is based on the concept of God as a perfect being, and it has been criticized by many philosophers. However, the argument has also been defended by others, and there is no easy way to resolve the debate over its validity.
What is the ontological argument?
The ontological argument is a philosophical argument for the existence of God that has been around for centuries. It is based on the idea that God is by definition the greatest possible being, and that a being that exists is greater than a being that does not exist. Therefore, God must exist.
What are the objections to the ontological argument?
There are many objections to the ontological argument. One objection is that it is circular, because it assumes the existence of God in its very definition of God. Another objection is that it is based on a faulty understanding of what it means for something to be “great.”
What is the cosmological argument?
The cosmological argument is an argument for the existence of God that is based on the idea that everything that exists has a cause. The argument goes like this:
- Everything that exists has a cause.
- The universe exists.
- Therefore, the universe has a cause.
- The cause of the universe must be something that exists outside of the universe.
- This something is what we call God.
What are the objections to the cosmological argument?
There are many objections to the cosmological argument. One objection is that it is based on the assumption that everything that exists has a cause. This assumption is not necessarily true, and there are other possible explanations for the existence of the universe.
Another objection is that the cosmological argument does not prove that the cause of the universe is God. The cause of the universe could be anything, including a natural process or another universe.
What is the teleological argument?
The teleological argument is an argument for the existence of God that is based on the order and complexity of the universe. The argument goes like this:
- The universe is orderly and complex.
- Order and complexity are evidence of design.
- Therefore, the universe must have been designed by a being with intelligence and power.
- This being is what we call God.
What are the objections to the teleological argument?
There are many objections to the teleological argument. One objection is that the order and complexity of the universe can be explained by natural processes. Another objection is that the argument is based on the assumption that order and complexity are always evidence of design. This assumption is not necessarily true, and there are other possible explanations for the order and complexity of the universe.
What is the moral argument?
The moral argument is an argument for the existence of God that is based on the existence of objective moral values. The argument goes like this:
- Objective moral values exist.
- Objective moral values cannot exist without a God.
- Therefore, God exists.
What are the objections to the moral argument?
There are many objections to the moral argument. One objection is that objective moral values do not exist. Another objection is that objective moral values can exist without a God.
What is the argument from religious experience?
The argument from religious experience is an argument for the existence of God that is based on the reports of people who have had religious experiences. The argument goes like this:
- Many people have had religious experiences.
- These religious experiences are often very powerful and convincing.
- Therefore, there is a good reason to believe that God exists.
What are the objections to the argument from religious experience?
There are many objections to the argument from religious experience. One objection is that religious experiences are not reliable. Another objection is that religious experiences can be explained by other factors, such as psychological factors or the power of suggestion.
Which of the following is not a premise of the ontological argument?
(A) God is the greatest possible being.
(B) A being that exists in reality is greater than a being that exists only in the mind.
(C) God exists in the mind.
(D) Therefore, God exists in reality.Which of the following is a criticism of the ontological argument?
(A) It is circular reasoning.
(B) It is based on a false premise.
(C) It is unsound.
(D) All of the above.Which of the following is a response to the criticism that the ontological argument is circular reasoning?
(A) The argument is not circular because it does not assume the conclusion.
(B) The argument is circular, but this is not a problem because it is a valid argument.
(C) The argument is circular, but this is not a problem because it is a Sound argument.
(D) The argument is circular, and this is a problem because it is not a valid argument.Which of the following is a response to the criticism that the ontological argument is based on a false premise?
(A) The premise that God is the greatest possible being is not false.
(B) The premise that a being that exists in reality is greater than a being that exists only in the mind is not false.
(C) Both premises are false.
(D) Neither premise is false.Which of the following is a response to the criticism that the ontological argument is unsound?
(A) The argument is sound.
(B) The argument is unsound, but this is not a problem because it is a valid argument.
(C) The argument is unsound, and this is a problem because it is not a valid argument.
(D) The argument is unsound because it is based on a false premise.