Ontological Argument vs. Cosmological Argument

1239 Words5 Pages
St. Anselm’s, Ontological Argument defends the conception of God being a great being. There can be no other being greater than God. This theory implies that only God exists or if not there could be another greater existent being. The greatest is God though. I do believe this. The conception of this belief appears both in mind and in reality. Has the conception of God been proven? Does it need to be proven? Can the conception of God simply be universally acknowledged and accepted by everyone, everywhere? If there is conception of God, then the idea of God should exist. The initial presentation states, “you who grant understanding to faith, grant that, insofar as you know it is useful for me, I may understand that you exist as we believe you exist, and that you are what we believe you to be.”(Encountering the Real Faith and Philosophical Enquiry; “Anselms Ontological Argument” – St. Anselm, pg. 139). It is always difficult to understand and comprehend for anything to exist realistically. For anything else to exist there must be a higher existence. A “Fool’s Objection” gives us the impression that there is no clear and distinct idea of anything being greater because it cannot be conceived. A so as result it is stated that “there is no God”. The rational mind states otherwise. It is what we say in our hearts that allow us to think that God does exist. In Samuel Clarke’s Cosmological Argument it is clearly argued that something has existed for all of eternity. Nothing was ever created without a cause therefore this is a contradiction. Yet if anything is made and there is no cause at all for it, is to say that something is affected when it is affected by nothing or at all affected. Anything that exists has a cause, a reason, a ground of its existence, a foundation on which its existence relies and an applicable rationale or reason why it does
Open Document