Part B. the Ontological Argument Is a Convincing Argument. Discuss
Part B. The ontological argument is a convincing argument. Discuss.
The ontological argument was first made famous in the 11th century by St Anslem from Canterbury and was later taken further by French philosopher Rene Descartes. The debate is an attempt to confirm God’s existence as a priori argument. It does not rely on observations of the world around us it simply uses logic and the idea that it is illogical to say that God does not exist as its main factor.
There are three elements to St Anslem’s ontological argument.
1) God =That than which nothing greater can be conceived.
2) Something that exists in reality and in your mind is greater than something that exists just in the mind.
3) Only the fool says there is no God.
These points, although confusing at first are relatively simple, the first statement simply means that God is the most perfect being imaginable and nothing is greater. Anslem then goes on to point out to be the greatest creature imaginable, God must exist. Finally to conclude his argument Anslem says that only the fool says there is no God. This is again very logical, and therefore convincing because Anslem is simply saying that something that exists in reality is greater that something limited to the mind, God is the greatest therefore only an idiot would say that God does not exist.
At this point I feel it is relevant to refer back to some independent research I carried out which stated that it is irrelevant Anslem is using God as his subject, the argument would still work if ‘X’ was the
The ontological argument was first made famous in the 11th century by St Anslem from Canterbury and was later taken further by French philosopher Rene Descartes. The debate is an attempt to confirm God’s existence as a priori argument. It does not rely on observations of the world around us it simply uses logic and the idea that it is illogical to say that God does not exist as its main factor.
There are three elements to St Anslem’s ontological argument.
1) God =That than which nothing greater can be conceived.
2) Something that exists in reality and in your mind is greater than something that exists just in the mind.
3) Only the fool says there is no God.
These points, although confusing at first are relatively simple, the first statement simply means that God is the most perfect being imaginable and nothing is greater. Anslem then goes on to point out to be the greatest creature imaginable, God must exist. Finally to conclude his argument Anslem says that only the fool says there is no God. This is again very logical, and therefore convincing because Anslem is simply saying that something that exists in reality is greater that something limited to the mind, God is the greatest therefore only an idiot would say that God does not exist.
At this point I feel it is relevant to refer back to some independent research I carried out which stated that it is irrelevant Anslem is using God as his subject, the argument would still work if ‘X’ was the