Anselm, Archbishop of Canterbury and a monk was the creator of the Ontological Argument. The main aspect behind the argument was that the existence of God was true, in simple words, God exists. The argument is deductive as it depends only on knowledge and logic, not on experience as experiencing God is impossible physically. It is also a priori for similar reasons; the argument relies on logic alone.…
The weaknesses of the Ontological Argument give support to Atheism. Discuss this claim (12 marks)…
In Zora Neale Hurston’s Their Eyes Were Watching God, we hear a story of a beautiful woman, Janie. Janie, as a child, is introduced to an idea of love and ever since wishes for romance. As she grows older, Janie runs into difficulties due to her gender. She ends up marrying two men, Logan and Joe, who continues to control Janie. After meeting Tea Cake, on the other hand, Janie is able to reach freedom. Janie wanted to reach her love, the dream, the horizon. In the process, Janie experiences oppression from Logan and Jody. Through Tea Cake’s help, Janie is able to take full control over herself.…
The ontological argument rests on the premise that the universe’s existence is contingent- it depends on something else to exist. The argument is deductive, analytic and a priori, and was first formed by St. Anselm, who prayed for a short argument that would prove God to be “that than which nothing greater can be conceived”. This prayer was called the proslogion and tried to prove God by means of reductio ad absurdum, which states that the existence of God is logically necessary. The argument is based on the word “God”, a being that possesses all perfections, therefore must exist. Anselm was aware that the existence of God is denied by atheists and in response to this, he states “the fool has said in his heart there is no God”.…
This argument is valid and is modus tollens. Ontological arguments are often accused of defining something into existence, one can show the nature of God, but cannot, in doing so, prove His existence. I do not feel that this argument is sound. I feel that it leaps from the notion of something existing in the understanding to the notion that it exists in reality without developing a clear concept or understanding of how that happens.…
The Ontological Argument (Question 1 part a and b) According to the Ontological Argument, the existence of God can be proven by merely appealing to the…
There are 3 main arguments that each seek to prove the existence of God; the Ontological, Cosmological, and Teleological Arguments. Each is different in its approach, but all arrive at the same conclusion. Ontological Argument argues God’s existence from the assumption of the existence a “Greatest Thing that can ever be conceived.” From there, it argues that in order for something to be “The Greatest Thing ever” it must exist physically (that is outside of the mind). The Cosmological Argument argues that since everything in the universe is contingent (or is dependent on other things for its existence), there must be a first cause that set the universe in motion.…
The cosmological argument proves the existence of God. It discusses contingent beings which exist, but could not have existed and necessary beings which exist and could not not exist. The cosmological says that there is a contingent being that exists. The existence of a contingent being must have a cause and the contingent being cannot be the cause of itself. The complete cause of a contingent being includes only other contingent beings or it includes a necessary being. Contingent beings alone cannot be the complete cause of a contingent being. The complete cause of a contingent being must include a necessary being. Therefore, a necessary being must exist. The cosmological argument shows that there must be a higher power, and that higher power is God. Everything that exists on earth is a contingent being. There is no person or animal that is not contingent. But what created everything to begin with if a contingent being cannot be the only cause of another contingent being? Everything on earth has a cause, but there must be a necessary being being that caused the Earth. There has to be something other than contingent beings. There has to be a necessary being that started everything. That necessary being is…
The argument that I have chosen for this assignment and feel more comfortable using when trying to convince an open-minded non-believer in the existence of God, is number 19 “The Common Consent Argument.” In my own words this argument argues that it is common that all individuals worship, respect, and admire God, many individuals has had their wrong opinion and been wrong their beliefs, and that everyone should believe in God and that God really do exist. It argues that there is some kind of God is intrinsic or innate and has existed deliberately in almost the whole humankind in history and if God didn’t exist, then God wouldn’t be as popular as he is. The strengths of the argument are that individuals all over the world people in God and a common part of the lives of individuals and their daily lives. Two of the arguments weaknesses are that it does not show the differences in the actual existence of some form of God and the desire that individuals have for God. The belief well-known in God can reflect the existence of God or the desire of the community for a protective force to have an answer for the hard questions, such as what happens after death and the reasons why it thunders. Another weakness is that the argument fit into place in a reasonable misleading notion misleading notion that is known as the bandwagon misleading notion. The attributes of God supported by the argument are: “For believing in God is like having a relationship with a person”, “God really is there, given such widespread belief in him”, “God is the result of childhood fears, that God is a projection of our human fathers: someone up there can protect us from natural forces we consider hostile”, and “God must be a cosmic projection of our human fathers.” I think that the argument might affect the non-believer intellectually and emotionally, because there are so many individuals who have their own view and their own opinions on God, many who believe that God really do exist and many who…
This destabilizes the entire argument, and philosophers and scientists both agree that proving cause and effect would be difficult. However, if we were to discard the principle of cause and effect then we would also be destabilising the theory science itself, which is based on succession of events. Unlike the first two arguments, the Ontological argument is entirely a priori, meaning it is based off reason alone rather than containing at least elements of a posteriori (experience). The argument demands that God is perfect, that existence is a predicate of perfection (which is criticised by Russel, who suggests the word existence is used incorrectly in this instance, but otherwise supports the argument), and through this suggests that God must be real in both our minds and in reality to be the greatest conceivable…
In this essay I will first explain the ontological argument and my reasons for choosing it. I will then discuss why I believe it is a better account for the existence of god than the teleological argument and the cosmological argument.…
“Sixthly, he would be surprised to hear that the mechanism of the watch was no proof of contrivance, only a motion to induce the mind to think so.” (Page 56) William Paley confidently suggests that there must have been a designer to make such a complex piece of machinery due to the undeniable fact that, to make something so complex, a well thought out plan is needed. A watch has intricate components that have a distinct shape and position within the watch. According to Paley, all of these parts have not come together by chance because it would be unnatural for something with such a particular combination to occur. Based on this, someone must have used their intellect to plan the exact arrangement of these parts so that it comes together to serve a purpose. A watch is a complex device, but nature is even more intricate. With this in mind, nature must have a designer because everything regarding nature is complex and it is very unlikely to be created without contrivance. Convincingly, Paley came up with the notion that there must be a God or transcendent being that created the universe, as well as all of the nature within it due to the fact that it seems implausible for something so complex to have been created with no thought or planning.…
b. Discuss any market trends or developments that are relevant or may impact on the organisation…
Ontological argument- The ontological argument relies on reason to explain the existence of God. It says that the idea that god exists in your mind is proof that god exists.…
Rene Descartes and God’s Existence Rene Descartes was a French philosopher, mathematician and a scientist in the seventeenth century. As a man of science, Descartes wanted to make discoveries in science as factual as mathematics. With Descartes’s faith, he did not eliminate God from philosophy. Descartes, “The Father of Modern Philosophy”, was a Catholic who wrote the Meditations on First Philosophy. “The Meditations is characterized by Descartes’s use of methodic doubt, a systematic procedure of rejecting as though false all types of belief in which one has been, or could ever be, deceived.”…