Anselm and Aquinas on Gods existence

Anselm and Aquinas views on Gods existence are different arguments trying to find out the same thing, does god exist? And if so what is he? I mostly agree with Anselm on the topic of that if god were to exist that he would have to be greater than anything conceived although I think Aquinas argument that if everything has the possibility of not being, then at sometime nothing exists and there would be nothing now, is too weak to merit my support. One of the premise of Anselms ontological argument is, that god is that witch nothing greater can be conceived. He is stating that god is all greatness and is perfect, that he is the best, the most worthy. Anselm says that god is the greatest, if there was a way to describe an example of it wouldnt be god anymore, because he says that you cannot conceive anything better than god. Another premise of Anselms ontological argument is that, god exists at least in our understanding. This means our mental existence or in thought. He is saying that if we think of something that is god then he exists in our brain because we have thought of him in the first place. An example if I think of a place where the grass is liquorish, then it has to exist at least in my mind because I have thought of it in the first place. Next, the premise that, if god existed only in the understanding, we could think of something greater than god. What he means here that something that exists both in understanding and in real existence is greater than something that only exists in thought. An example is that having fun is great in thought and it is greater if it was also true in actuality. The last premise Anselm has on this issue is that god exists in reality. God is found in both in thought and in reality because something can be greater than god if he hadnt existed in reality. He means that god is not only exists in thought but also in exists independently of ideas concerning god. An example is that the pop can exists independently of anything concerning the pop can and because I have thought of it, it also exists in the mind. Therefore the pop can exists in reality. Aquinas first argument is from motion His first premise is that, some things are in motion.. He means that there are objects that are moved from potentiality to actuality. if anything is in motion; it is moved by another mover. This means that if something has move from potentiality to actuality, then it was caused by something else. An example of this is the wood to catch on fire you need fire. if there is another mover, and then there is a first mover.He means there has to be a starting thing that started the line of moving. An example is that, fire is made by fire and so on; then there has to be a first fire.

Last of Aquinass premises is that, the first mover is god. He is saying that god is the first to be created because he is the one that moves the mover, which moved the object. An example is the first to set wood on fire is god and God is the first fire. Anselm argument stated that god exists in reality is because god is the greatest ever can be conceived, he exists in the mind, something is greater if it is in reality and it is also in our understanding. Anselm has little clarity of what he means of greatness, what is greatness, and the meaning of reality, whose reality, is there more than one reality. He has constancy in his arguments. Anselms argument has flaws in his coherence his premises are irrational and have gaps in argument how can a perfect island exist if it is an island that which cannot be convinced as getter than and would be greater if it existed in reality. Anselms argument is comprehensive and answers more questions than asked. Anselm argument is compatible because it isnt a farfetched argument. His argument has a compelling argument that challenges his writings.

Aquinas argument is that god is the first mover Aquinas argument has little clarity on motion and some things. He has consistency in his argument and is coherent and what he is saying. His comprehensiveness on the issue was not very well he brings up more questions than he does answering them. The compatibility of his argument also does not have very farfetched ideas. He does not have compelling arguments on his work. Anselm and Aquinas have different views of what god is. Anselm is saying that god is the greatest and nothing better can be conceived, and god exists because, if something is existing in thought and in reality then it is better than something that only exists in thought, so god exists in reality. But Aquinas says that things are changed in life from potentiality to actuality, and god is the first actuality which means that he is actuality without changing from potentiality, so god is unchanging. The difference between the arguments is that Anselm believes god exists in reality and nothing can be conceived that is greater. On the other hand Aquinas believes that god is unchanging and god is the first one to change objects from potentiality to actuality. However Anselm and Aquinas also have similar views on the view of god. They both believe that god is the greatest and nothing can be conceived to be better than him, because the first is the purist one made because that one is the model is used to make other things in the universe. They also both believe that god exists. Anselm believes that god exists in reality because he is the greatest. Aquinas believes that god is the first to change others and he is unchangeable. In conclusion Anselm and Aquinas views on god are very different but if we take a closer look we will also see that they are also very similar.