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
chapter‚ Popper‚ Conjecture and Refutation‚ Goddfrey communicates the basic ideas that set Popper apart from other philosophers of science‚ and explains how his theories are still important half a century after their conception. I will first outline the components of Poppers theory‚ and then continue to summarize the known objections to his theories. It will then
Premium Scientific method Science Epistemology
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
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
Can the Use of Torture be Justified? This report aims to‚ in the first instance‚ define torture. It then examines the history of torture and looks at international law that relates to torture. The main part of the study analyses ethical theories in relation to torture and uses these ethical viewpoints to examine whether or not torture can be justified in any circumstances. In addition‚ the Algerian War and the Iraq War will be used as case studies to further discuss the ethical issues surrounding
Premium Ethics Morality Iraq War
of social work have been identified‚ and they include structural‚ conventional‚ anti-oppressive‚ and radical social work. Different ontological assumptions facilitate the understanding of different theoretical perspectives underpinning social work. These include modernism‚ pre-modernism‚ and post-modernism. Ontological assumptions aid in explaining
Premium Sociology Social work Psychology
experienced torturers are available only if torture is institutionalised. 3. Torture by unskilled and inexperienced torturers is always unjustified. 4. However‚ institutionalising torture has very bad consequences; it will mean that torture will metastasise instead of being limited to one-off cases. 5. Conclusion: Torture is never justified (one should never torture). This can be an additional argument for the theory of deontology‚ as are we professional tortures? Nowadays‚ a lot of the governments in
Premium Psychology Management Thought
Terrorism and Torture In the threat of national security‚ the debate on torture is confronted with legal and moral dilemmas of permissibility. In the hypothetical case of the ticking-bomb terrorist‚ torture is perceived as either an advantageous means of national security‚ or a violation of human rights. Although it is a “slippery slope‚” in order to preserve the balance between national security and civil liberties in a democratic society‚ torture should be prohibited. Considering terrorist
Premium Torture United States Human rights