This essay aims to outline the Ontological Argument‚ proposed by Anselm of Canterbury‚ to prove the existence of God (in particular the Christian God). It also discusses Gaunilo’s objection to the ontological argument with the use of the “Lost Island” analogy. And finally offers an opinion as to whether or not Gaunilo’s objection successfully refutes Anselm’s argument. Anselm’s ontological argument‚ sourced from the “Proslogium” (with himself as the author)‚ is a highly controversial argument
Premium Ontological argument Ontology
The ontological argument for God’s existence is a work of art resulting from philosophical argumentation. An ontological argument for the existence of God is one that attempts the method of a priori proof‚ which utilizes intuition and reason alone. The term a priori refers to deductive reasoning. Deductive reasoning is the type of reasoning that proceeds from general principles or premises to derive particular information. The argument works by examining the concept of God‚ and arguing that it implies
Premium
Pascal’s Wager vs. the Ontological Argument Pascal’s Wager was a groundbreaking theory posed by the French philosopher‚ mathematician‚ and physicist Blaise Pascal. Pascal‚ who is said to be the father of modern probability‚ felt that that religion should be approached as a gamble. It was one of the first efforts to incorporate the concept of infinity. The wager stated that‚ even though the existence of God cannot be determined through reason‚ one should wager as though God exists‚ because living
Premium God Atheism Existence
Anselm’s ontological argument for the existence of god is done via “A Priori” argument meaning this argument uses mostly reasoning and definition to prove his point. Anselm begins his Chapter 2 argument with his own understanding of God‚ “I may understand that you exist as we believe you exist‚ and that you are what we believe you to be. Now we believe that you are something that which nothing greater can be thought.” (Feinberg‚ p. 30). Anslem’s understanding of God is a vital part for this argument
Premium Ontology Existence Atheism
Ethical Theory Examination Ethical Theory Examination An action can be considered ethical or unethical depending on the perspective. There are three main theories of ethics: virtue‚ utilitarianism‚ and deontology. Each theory uses different criteria to determine if an action is ethical. Although the idea of performing ethical actions is similar‚ each theory follows a different approach. The virtue theory of ethics determines what is right and wrong based upon how it will affect one’s character
Premium Ethics Morality Philosophy
forces because of its complexity. Thus‚ stumbling upon such an object provides good reason to conclude that there is a personal agent who designed it.” DePoe explains that Paley’s watch example suffered a major set back by the introduction of Darwin’s theory of evolution. Evolution offered a naturalistic explanation as to how life could possess the intricacy of “parts that have been adapted to perform their specific functions.” DePoe explains that an atheist’s main retort to the teleological argument
Premium Charles Darwin Teleological argument David Hume
Ethical Theories‚ Principles‚ Policies‚ Choice making Ethical Theories- Ethical theories are based on the previously explained ethical principles. They each emphasize different aspects of an ethical dilemma and lead to the most ethically correct resolution according to the guidelines within the ethical theory itself. People usually base their individual choice of ethical theory upon their life experiences (1‚2). Deontology The deontological theory states that people should adhere to their
Premium Ethics Utilitarianism
all the ethical theories‚ natural rights ethics is the best overall theory. Natural rights theory is the best theory because it stays consistent and promotes equality among people. Also‚ the natural rights theory can help people maintain their dignity by allowing their rights to not be taken away. There are theories that are not as adequate as natural rights theory. Mill’s utilitarianism‚ Kantian deontology‚ and virtue ethics have flaws. Natural rights theory is better than the others theories for multiple
Premium Ethics Morality Plato
Ethical Theory Comparison Ethical Theory Comparison Ethics are a part of everyday life. Dependent on the individuals focus‚ ethics can be a core value or a term used when needed. This comparison will assist with understanding the morality of individual decisions or choices based on the ethical system inherited. Virtue based theories centers on good character behavior‚ a type of human growth that forms good decision making and control of bad habits. Virtue also creates a format that eliminates
Premium Ethics Morality Virtue
alone but also for all susceptible children in the community. This justification will be reinforced using two ethical theories that nullify the refusal of administration of the vaccine by a guardian‚ the first theory that will be exhausted will be Act Utilitarianism and further reinforced using W.D. Ross’s Ethical Pluralism theory. Act utilitarianism (AU) is a fairly straightforward theory with an obligation to equality and impartiality. It comprises of mainly utility and disutility‚ or in simple
Premium Ethics Vaccine Vaccination