Hannah Wilson Professor Skirry Philosophy of Religion Essay Exam 2 Prompt 1 Anselm’s version of the Ontological Argument is an a priori and deductive argument. In this argument, Anselm talks through six points. In the first point he says that God is a being than which none greater can be thought of. In the second point, he mentions an understanding that God exists in the mind. In the third point, he says that a being that exists in the mind and reality is much greater than a being that just exists in one of those states. In the fourth point, Anselm just states that if God only exists in the mind, then there can be a being thought of which exists in both of the previous mentioned states. In the fifth point, he says that we cannot imagine a being greater than God. He then concludes in the sixth point that God must exist. These premises are supposed to support the conclusion by proving that God exists. Anselm presupposed that God could already exist in someone’s …show more content…
These types of arguments come up with a conclusion that only has the possibility of being true. It could conclude with the idea that something likely exists or that it probably exists. This makes these arguments mush weaker than a deductive argument. These arguments are based on observations in the natural world; they work to prove that things are there for a purpose. After all, “telos” means a goal, or end, or purpose. In his argument, Paley uses the creative aspects of a watch to relate to the organization in nature. This goes to say that it is hard to believe that nature was created randomly or spontaneously. Just as a watch’s aspects need a creator, the natural world likewise needs a creator. Since there is evidence of design in the world, Paley states that there must be a creator. Paley’s argument is an argument by analogy. Thing is, his analogy makes