He states that for the fool to say that there ‘is no God’ the fool has to have an idea of what God is in their minds. Anselm puts forward that the definition that in the mind of God is the ‘greatest possible being’ therefore making him the greatest possible being that can be conceived. He then points out that it is greater to exist in reality than in the mind alone. An example of this is Santa clause; people are able to discuss the idea of him and give a description of what he does but just because we are able to discuss him it does not mean he exists. To Anselm the most important factors is being able to exist in reality as well as in the mind this therefore makes it greater than just being an idea of the mind.
He then goes on to say that it is always greater to exist in reality (in re) than just in the mind (in intellectu). The last part logically concludes that if there is no greater being than God, then God must exist in both the mind and reality. If God was to only exist in in our thoughts and not in reality then we would be able to think of a greater being, e.g. the prime minister because he exists in both reality and our minds. But because it’s impossible to conceive a greater being that God he must exist in both reality and our minds.
Central to Anselm’s argument is the belief that it is greater to exist than not exist, and if God is the greatest-possible being, then by definition, God must exist. If God, only existed as an idea, then that God would not be the greatest possible being because we could think of something greater, namely something that exists in reality. Anselm also points out that even if we don’t know rationally or logically that God exists, there are no logical contradictions in talking about God existing. It is not a contradiction of terms, as,
This argument became known as Pascal’s Wager. If we examine Paley’s argument in Natural Theology, we see that it is not a good argument for the existence of G-d. It makes a jump from a designer of the universe to the assumption that this designer is somehow the Omni-G-d without any proof. Nevertheless, from Paley’s invalid argument we can create an argument that shows the existence of a designer of the universe. Through the idea of irreducible complexity, we see that there must be designer to the universe.
Explain how Descartes developed Anselm’s argument that God’s existence is necessary Firstly, if we briefly look at Anselm and his ontological argument, which appears to be a priori proof of God’s existence. Anselm writes, “we believe that thou art a being than which nothing greater can be conceived”, this meaning that we all have the belief that there is a perfect being, a being which cannot be improved upon. Anselm uses God as this being. In the first form of Anselm’s argument, he says that if God wasn’t real, if he only existed in the mind (as an idea), then a greater being could be imagined to exist both in the mind and in reality. That being would be greater than God.
Although, these three arguments all agree in the way that they use unfound assumptions to prove what has yet to be proven; they do disagree on the studies of how to prove what really is God. The ontological argument believes that God is a “being”. The cosmological argument believes that God is “the universe”. Then there is the design argument which needs evidence to prove that there is a God. The Ontological argument seeks to prove that God does exist by proving, that He cannot not exist.
defining God as maximal perfection, there literally cannot be anything greater than God as God is the greatest thing that can possibly exist. If the ontological argument proves that God exists, then it basically does so without question regardless of what someone would wish to call such a being of maximal perfection. This then leads to the point that if someone was rational why should they be reluctant to call such a being ‘God’ or even why God wouldn’t be the greatest possible being there is. When defining God as the greatest possible being, it does raise a few questions and arguments when stating such a strong statement. One of these is it has been significantly more of a challenge to demonstrate that God is not possible.
Therefore, God exists. William Paley was an Archdeacon of Carlisle who lived from 1743-1805, he put forward what is probably the most famous version of the design argument, in his book ‘Natural Theology’. Paley made use of an analogy to draw conclusions about the nature of the world and the need for an intelligent designer who provides purpose to the world. Paley’s version of the teleological argument differs from that of Aquinas’ version as Paley’s argument came from purpose as a contrast to regularity that Aquinas’ argument came from. Aquinas’ version was arguing from design qua regularity.
This paper is to explain the Ontological argument, followed by the discussion of the objection and the response to the objection, and concludes with my opinion of the actual argument. The purpose of Saint Anselm’s Ontological argument, is to prove through 12 premises that God does exist in reality. Yet through objections, such as Gaunilo’s Parody, it will be shown that the Ontological argument contains flaws. Though there are substantial premises to the Ontological argument, the objection nevertheless rejects them; However, Anselm attempts to salvage his argument by then refusing the parody. The Ontological argument is set up to prove God exists in reality by justifying it as a priori, which in this instance means that God is understood to exist in reality even though Anselm has not witnessed God himself.
in order to be valid it has to be deductive in order to be sound it has to be valid. premises must be true in our world with no changes for the argument. if the premises can be made true and the conclusion is true it's valid soundness is a further feature of validity. jackson reading- the mind is above the physical.it has to be experienced 1. Darwins dangerous idea was that he asked the question who created life, and his response was that no one did which in it's nature denies the supernatural explanation of the universe.