St. Anselm argued that the very idea of God entails its existence as a mandatory consequence, to wit: “And definitely that than which a better can’t be imagined can’t be within the understanding alone. For whether it is at the very least within the understanding alone, it may be imagined to be in actuality too, which is bigger. Due to this fact if that than which a better can’t be imagined is within the understanding alone, that very factor than which a better can’t be imagined is one thing than which a better might be imagined.
However definitely this can’t be. There exists, due to this fact, past doubt one thing than which a better can’t be imagined, each within the understanding and in actuality.
” (Anselm’s Ontological Argument: Proslogium) If God is certainly that best being of which He has no equal then it’s mandatory that He should have the attribute of existence. If he doesn’t exist then he isn’t the best being as a result of a better being might be conceived, one which each exist in idea and in actuality.
Because of this for God to be the best being He should exist not simply within the thoughts but in addition in actuality. As a result of existence within the thoughts alone lacks an essential side of perfection and that’s existence. Thus God exist. I’ve learn a number of statements trying to show God’s existence utilizing arguments. I discovered most of these arguments logically convincing and philosophically sound. These arguments are the Cosmological Argument, Teleological Argument and the Spiritual Expertise Argument.
I nonetheless discover St. Anselm’s Ontological Argument the least convincing of all these arguments that I’m conversant in. After studying and understanding this argument it’s as if I’m again to the place I began – ignorant. I share the identical objection with the opposite philosophers who assume that this argument runs round in circles. Based mostly on St. Anselm’s argument, perfection implies that which no different better being might be conceived. Perfection additionally implies existence as a result of one thing won’t be excellent if it doesn’t have the attribute of perfection.
I can use the identical argument to argue that there exists an ideal dad or mum, or an ideal professor or an ideal president or an ideal pal. In my instance, if my idea of excellent dad or mum is one who offers me with greater than sufficient cash for my allowance, it’s all the time potential for me to assume of one other dad or mum who may give me more cash. Because of this, not solely that the very nature of an ideal dad or mum is logically not believable it additionally can not exist in fact.
In accordance with Gaunilo of Marmoutier, St. Anselm dedicated the error of complicated the existence of an thought with the existence of the factor that corresponds with the thought. (Kenneth Einar Himma) In my instance, St. Anselm thought that what’s within the thoughts is similar as that which is in fact. This isn’t all the time the case since I can all the time assume of an ideal ice cream which have by no means existed and will by no means exist. My third objection towards St.
Anselm’s Ontological argument is that it presumes that the existence of one thing is sweet and that existence is an attribute of perfection. I disagree. The presence of pimples on my face won’t make me excellent. Dandruff on the scalp of my hair isn’t any manner close to perfection. The presence of homicide in each society is much from being thought of an ideal society. I’d somewhat need that there might be no extra genocide, abortion, and infanticide in our society. The purpose is that it doesn’t all the time observe that existence of one thing is sweet.