Janae Smith TA Quincy Faircloth September 29, 2010

Ontological Argument; Sound
The ontological argument by Anselm states: Premise One: God by definition is the most perfect being. Premise Two: It is better to exist in reality than in the mind alone. Conclusion: God exists in reality. For an argument to be sound, all the premises are true as well as the conclusion. For this deductive argument my view is that Anselm¶s argument is sound and I believe this because the intricacies and beauty of earthly beings cannot exist in reality if there was not a more perfect being creating them to begin with. Premise one is proven to be true. For example, the complexity of our planet alone points to a deliberate designer who created such a flawless universe, hence God.The size of Earth is perfect in a sense that if it were even a little bit smaller it would not be able to sustain an atmosphere. Due to the atmosphere earth can allow plants, animals, and human life in which no other planet can. Also, Earth is the exact distance, to the fraction, away from the sun to keep life from freezing or burning; any other distance would make life impossible. Thus concluding that this perfect universe is only in existence from there being a perfect designer, God: who creates all things from nothing. Further support for this claim comes from the fact that if God exists; he exists necessarily; meaning in all reality. God being defined as the most perfect being means that he would have the greatest possible perfection of existence. Since this statement is true by

a believer of God¶s existence in reality. Kant states that existence is not a property. By doubting that they are saying that there is something greater than God which is a contradiction of the definition of God. it holds true in all possible worlds therefore leading to the conclusion that God exists in reality. Someone who doubts God¶s existence at least knows what God is. existence cannot be associated with a definition. ³One cannot infer the extramental existence of anything by analyzing its definition´-Encarta. Further stating. the most basic criticism against the ontological argument is that Anselm cannot prove existence without any reference to the world especially since it is classified as a priorie. would respond in such a way that God is omnipotent to the greatest possible magnitude. meaning not based on experience. Just because Guanilo was told about the lost island and understands the idea of it. God cannot do what is rationally impossible but he can do anything that can be done. then the existence of the island in reality is uncertain to one¶s understanding. On the other hand. Some argue that if God is said to have perfect power can he create a round square? In which I. affirming the truth of the conclusion. He explains that anything can exist using the method of definitions. Guanilo states that the ontological argument is equivalent to there being a lusciously rich µlost island¶ that is impossible to reach but full of unlimited wealth and delicacies. one who believes Anselm merely defined God into existence.definition. thus cannot be true. had a fallacious argument himself for the conclusion. If the island was not shown as a real and unquestionable fact. the greatest thing to be conceived. . For example. Guanilo. does not mean it automatically exists in reality.

It is one thing for an object to be in the understanding. there would be no such thing as the perfect universe in which we breathe this perfect air.´ Anselm states in chapter three. ³God cannot be conceived not to exist²God is that.I will oppose Guanilo¶s claim by stating that if God exists in the understanding alone: then he can be perceived to exist in reality. . Sure. but the evidence to support God¶s existence in reality is of infinite sum. which is immensely greater. Creating such perfection from nothing leads to nothing greater being able to be conceived. meaning in all reality.²that which can be conceived not to exist is not God. there might be people such as Kant and Gaunilo who oppose Anselm¶s argument. The ontological argument stated by Anselm contains two true premises and a true conclusion thus defined as a sound argument. hence God. If God was not the most perfect being. than which nothing greater can be conceived. I strongly believe in this ontological argument¶s validity and pray for those who are against it only to hope they will one day come to realization. but a completely different concept to understand the object that exists necessarily.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful