He also states that cause/source must be greater than the effect/idea. He has an idea of God. Since God is supreme and perfect in every meaning, the cause of Descartes’ idea of God should be God himself. Therefore God necessarily exists. My objection is if something cannot come from nothing, then God also must come from something.
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.
Anselm’s argument is based on the idea that anyone who hears about God or thinks about God, has an idea of who God is. Even if a person denies the existence of God, he or she have to accept that God at least exists in a persons understanding, as an idea. Anselm argues that there is therefore the possibility of God existing purely in the mind alone, or alternatively in the mind and also in reality. Anselm defined God as “that…which nothing greater can be conceived”, he is all powerful, all-loving and all-knowing. 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.
Explain Anselms ontological argument Part A The ontological argument is used as a rational explanation to support the existence of God. Anselms ontological argument is known as a “classic “explanation of the ontological argument and is used widely to support the existence of God. The ontological argument is a priori argument meaning that theories are developed to prove the existence of God using nothing but intellectual insight and reason: it does not depend upon our experience of the world to be verified. Anselm defines God by saying God is that “which nothing greater can be conceived.” A way to simplify this explanation is thinking of God as being the greatest thing there can be, i.e. defining God as maximal perfection, there literally cannot be anything greater than God as God is the greatest thing that can possibly exist.
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. He still understands there to be a God. Since Anselm can establish an understanding, he claims he can prove that God does dually exist in both reality and in the understanding. St. Anselm presents the first premise of the Ontological argument as follows, Every being that exists, exists in the understanding or in the reality or both. (Perry, p.78) Based on the foundational beliefs of Rene Descartes, we already know that ‘I think’ and ‘I exist‘.
Humanity is able to conceive of God and his nature of omnipotent, omnibenevolent and omniscient, whether a theist or an atheist, we can all conceive of these qualities of a perfectly good being – God. We reach the understanding of these qualities through our human cognition of the definition of God which is a supreme being. God holding the title of a supreme being subsequently defines him as an ultimate being whom is positioned above every other being in society. If we can envisage God and comprehend his definition then we are obliged to agree that premise one is logically true. With acceptance in its entirety and no questions left unanswered, we are able to progress onto Anselm’s second premise which states ‘It is possible for God to exist in the mind alone, or in reality as
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.
This tells us that regardless of differing religions, all experiences originate from the ultimate reality and act as proof for the existence of God. Lastly, there is pragmatism. James was a pragmatist and therefore believed that truth is not fixed. It alters as our values change. From looking at the
If this definition is correct (which Anselm stresses very strongly is true), God is perfect and greater than any other thing in existence. It is upon this definition that Anselm places his argument. An existent God is clearly greater than a non-existent one and therefore, God – who is perfect by definition – must
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.