The Ontological Argument

The ontological argument was first developed by St. Anselm. In his address, Anselm considered the Fool of Psalm 14, who held the belief that there is no God. He justified that the Fool’s argument was indeed self-undermining. In the ontological argument, Anselm argued that denying that God exists shows that God does exist. He labeled God as a unique perfect being; all-knowing, all-good, and all-powerful. In his argument, Anselm draws the distinction between “existing in the mind” and “existing in reality”. The example provided was when a person intends on doing something, it exist in the mind; whereas when a person has actually done something, it exist in reality. However, there are many things that exist only in reality such as the example

Anselm believed in a perfect being theology, and support for premise one resides within Anselm's Principle of God's Necessary Perfection (Marenbon 121). A being 'that which nothing greater can be conceived' is by definition the greatest being, or most perfect being, possible. He uses the idea that 'that which nothing greater can be conceived' exists in someone's mind as a starting point, and seeks to build upon this foundation to show that God necessarily exists in reality as well. If it could not be conceived in one's understanding, then as far as this argument is concerned, it couldn't be shown to exist in reality as well.

Gaunilo criticizes against Anselm’s view on how to confirm the existence of God using the same method in a form of reductio ad absurdum. In this case the example of a perfect island is utilized. One may dream or

It seems that Anselm is saying one statement, but that statement contradicts previous statements that he has come up with. Anselm’s ontological argument then becomes weak because he is not consistent with his argument. He argues one point, then in the next argument he contradicts his last point by stating something in the complete opposite direction. This makes it very difficult for a reader to actually understand what Anselm is trying to

Moreover, Anselm reiterates that God is perfect and greater than any other thing in existence. As a result, something that exists in reality (de re) is superior to something that only exists in the mind (de dicto). In retrospect, Anselm claims that ‘existing’ is a defining predicate of the subject ‘God.’ The perfection of God allows him to exist because anything less than perfect means that he does not, therefore by definition he is not God. As a result, ‘God exists’ indicates an analytic statement, making it true by

According to Saint Anselm, the ontological argument is an argument that does not appeal to anything known through experience and states that God must exist since there is nothing greater that can be thought of (God I,10). Saint Anselm’s argument has been strongly criticized throughout the years, but the strongest criticism has come from Guanilo. Guanilo states that if Anselm’s argument is true than his argument could be used to prove things to be true that have no reason to be thought of as such. In order to prove his point, Guanilo uses an example of a lost island. This lost island is the most excellent of islands and no island is more excellent than this one, so according to Anselm’s argument since no greater island can be thought of, the

The Ontological Argument was first thought up by St. Anselm of Canterbury stating that God is an existing being and no other existing being is greater, proving that God does existed. There is no physical proof, you just have to ask yourself and think about it, however, just because some things are possible does not make it true. This lead questioning to Anselm’s reasoning, if a pink gorilla is possible but does not truly exist in reality, how can God be possible and exist in reality? Lemma, smaller proof conducted in a larger proof, is a type of proof in Reductio ad Absurdum, proving that the conclusion of something is true due to proving the opposite is not. Stating that, to be God in all reality, and certain being must exist and be perfect

Anselm’s Ontological Theory In this essay, I will argue why I believe Anselm’s ontological theory to be false. Anselm defined God as "that than which nothing greater can be conceived." He believes that this being must exist in the mind. This theory on the existence of God was highly debated and questioned throughout hundreds of years and even up until present day.

First let's look at some of these traditional philosophical texts to which I speak. St. Anselm in his essay: The Ontological Argument wants to demonstrate that god exists and that only a supreme good is required and that all other beings require as well for their existence. Why is it so simple? God is simply good and existence is required? Maybe god is thought, maybe god is not a being, maybe god is an idea, an energy, an intention, a collective of humanity.

However, there are many reasons that the ontological argument can be deemed invalid. It equivocates between different frames of reference. "Nothing greater that can be thought" is not the same as "nothing greater than can exist." This argument only really shows that the greatest thing to exist in reality will always be "greater" than its imaginary counterpart, which is not true as anything that exists in reality is more susceptible to flaws, but a

He said that according to Anselm's line of reasoning, if he envisioned an island that is beautiful and sparkling and completely perfect, then it must exist. For an island that does exist would be more perfect than one that does not exist. Gaunilo said that we cannot simply define things into existence. We cannot show an island or God exists simply by analyzing that idea.

The ontological argument is one of the most prominent arguments with in philosophy. Ontological comes from the Greek word “ontos” meaning “being” or “what there is”. Ontology credits the existence of God to overall essence of God. The ontology argument questions the nature of being which includes questioning the existence of God. As made apparent in “Introduction to Philosophy: Classical and Contemporary Readings” many philosophers have different views and theories on the existence of God. Anslem and Aquinas provide arguments that support the existence of God but still offer some differences.

Many different philosophers have argued the existence of God in the form of ontological arguments. The first philosopher to make such argument is Saint Anselm of Canterbury. St. Anselm argued that God is “something than which nothing greater can be imagined” (Barnes). He believed that there was nothing in this world whose existence and understanding could be imagined to be greater than the existence of God and that even a fool would agree that there is something in this universe in which nothing can be greater than. Another philosopher who argued on the existence of god is Guanilo. Guanilo argued that if the greatest of something (he gave the argument of an island) can exist in the mind, then it must have to exist in reality. If there is something

Premise number one is Anselm’s conception of God. Premise number two is a logical truth, again according to Anselm. Finally, premise number three simply follows from the previous two premises. In short, Anselm’s thinking behind his argument is “because a supreme being exists in the understanding, it must exist in reality.” He defends his argument by comparing a non-existent “something” with an existent “something”. An existent “something”, says Anselm, is greater than a non-existent “something”. If God were non-existent, then we could imagine a God greater than he, namely an

One of the earliest recorded objections to Anselm's argument was raised by one of Anselm's contemporaries, Gaunilo of Marmoutiers. One of the problems that he brings forth is that Anselm’s argument could be applied to things other than God. If the argument were valid, it could be applied to things that are clearly imaginary. Here is where the example of the lost island is introduced. Gaunilo invited his readers to think of the greatest, or most perfect, conceivable island. As a matter of fact, it is likely that no such island actually exists. However, his argument would then say that we aren't thinking of the greatest conceivable island, because the greatest