ipl-logo

Gaunilo's Ontological Argument

924 Words4 Pages

1. Present the strongest version of the ontological argument that you can. Explain either Gaunilo’s or Kant’s objection to the ontological argument. How is that objection supposed to work?

Saint Anselm delivered the strongest ontological argument for God through conceptual analysis. The ontological argument is a deductive argument that is an analytical statement that can be constructed by definition(s). He argues that one thing is necessary to exist, and that thing is God. God is a necessary being. His argument is known as reductio ad absurdum, which demonstrates through a contradiction that God exists. Anselm delivered the first known ontological argument in a prayer. He claimed, 1) God exists in the understanding, 2) good might have existed in reality, 3) if something exists only in the understanding, then it is possible for it to be greater, 4) suppose God exists only in the understanding, 5) God might have been greater than it is, and 6) the greatest possible being could have been greater. There is a contradiction between #4 and #6. Guanilo counters Anselm’s argument by demonstrating that one could substitute different words with God and make absurd claims. For instance, he substitutes God for …show more content…

The first part of the argument demonstrates that infinity does not exist. The present would not exist because we could never reach an exact point in infinity. This displays the fact that the universe had a beginning. Current scientific theories show that the universe had a beginning 14.5 billion years ago. The second part of the argument claims that time started with the beginning of the universe. Therefore, God is not a part of time and is not a temporal being. The Kalam argument differs from Aquinas’s argument because it deals with the problem of a non-temporal being who simultaneously creates the universe and time. The Kalam argument deals with time, empirical data, and

Show More
Related
458 Words | 2 Pages

What phrase does Anselm use to designate God? Explain why he formulates his designation in this way. Do you think this is an appropriate way to speak of God? The Phrase he used was “God is that than which no greater can be conceived”. There are two reasons as to why Anselm words this the way he does, reason one is the idea that “ no greater can be conceived” he doesn’t want you to be able to think about something greater hence the idea that no greater can be thought of by a person.

Read More
590 Words | 3 Pages

The Kalam Cosmological Argument and the B-theory of time INTRODUCTION Inherent in the Kalam Cosmological Argument, as defended by WIlliam Lane Craig, is the assumption of the A-theory of time. The A-theory of time accepts the view that there is a past, present and future, where future moments become increasingly present, and present moments become increasing past. Time exists very much like the way we experience it. The alternative view, the B-theory of time, sees time as a totality, that all times exist equally, or are equally real. Moments in time are ordered/related in terms of earlier-than, simultaneous with and later-than.

Read More
899 Words | 4 Pages

No matter how messed up, annoying, or just plain out crazy your family is, at the end of the day they’re still your family and you love them. In the book The Glass Castle by Jeannette Walls, you will learn and read about a very dysfunctional family. Throughout Jeanette’s childhood she went through constant struggles. From catching on fire trying to cook herself a hog dogs when she was 3, to moving over 20 times throughout the years while her parents struggled to keep a roof over their heads and food on the table. Jeanette shows us that despite bad parenting, a child can still become resilient.

Read More
1377 Words | 6 Pages

Anselm’s argument is based on this known definition of the concept of God alone. Descartes’ argument for the existence of God is based on his foundation of knowledge, logic. Humans have the idea in their minds of infinite perfection. Humans also have the idea of themselves as inferior to this idea as imperfect. For humans to have the idea of infinite perfection, there must be truth in the reason for them having this idea.

Read More
871 Words | 4 Pages

The first premise of my argument is, there has never been the case in our lives were a thing was the efficient cause of its self. This premise says that nothing can be the cause of itself and thus it cannot have existed before it has existed. An example is a cup made of plastic, the cup is not its first efficient cause since it cannot create its self. The cup was created by a human who is the first efficient cause, he used a machine and plastic which are intermediary causes leading to the ultimate cause, the plastic

Read More
862 Words | 4 Pages

In this paper, I will deliver a reconstruction of Descartes’ Cogito Argument and my reasoning to validate it as indubitable. I will do so by justifying my interpretations through valid arguments and claim, by showcasing examples with reasoning. Rene Descartes is a French Philosopher of the 17th century, who formulated the philosophical Cogito argument by the name of ‘cogito ergo sum,’ also known as “I think, therefore, I am.” Rene was a skeptic philosopher amongst many scholastic philosophers of his time. To interpret his cogito argument as indubitable and whether it could serve as a foundational belief, he took a skeptical approach towards the relations between thoughts and existence.

Read More
1797 Words | 8 Pages

In this essay, I will set out to prove that Thomas Aquinas’ First Cause Argument does not show that God exists and the conclusion that God exists does not follow from the premises of the first cause argument. I do think that the conclusion is valid and could be sound/or has the potential to be, but the premises fail to provide the basis upon which to reach such a conclusion. Hence, I will be raising some objections to the premises and will try to disprove any counter-arguments that could be raised in its defense. This would be done by examining Aquinas’ First Cause Argument and trying to disprove it whilst countering arguments in its defense.

Read More
901 Words | 4 Pages

A chair, for example, could not exist if a certain tree did not grow to provide the wood as a building material. Furthermore, the chair would not have been built if the carpenter did not assemble it. That same carpenter would not have been alive to create the chair if his parents did not birth him. It stands to reason that you are able to follow these chain events backwards from the creation of the chair to infinity. Copleston believes that if we reach to that infinity, there will be no rationalization for existence so it is necessary that there is something, which relies only on itself for existence, to have been the start of infinity.

Read More
539 Words | 3 Pages

Anselm famously associated with the “ontological argument” for the existence of God. Anselm, in Proslogion, coined the term “ontological” to describe a branch of philosophy that deals with the notion of “being or existence.” (McGrath & OverDrive, Inc. 2001 p. 181). Proslogion is a work of meditation, not of logical argument.

Read More
1273 Words | 6 Pages

The ontological argument is noted, showing an a priori argument for God’s existence, dismisses evidence made with the senses but rather on analysis of idea of God. Descartes holds the view that God- as a supremely perfect being must exist, as it is part of God’s essence. If God did not exist, then he would not be a supreme perfection, which Descartes asserts is one of his distinct qualities. Thus, the argument here shows us that the idea of God necessarily must

Read More
382 Words | 2 Pages

According to the text book, Anselm’s conception of God was the ontological argument that “being than which nothing greater can be conceived.” If God doesn’t exist, there could be something imagined that is greater than God, an existent greatest being, but this being would be God. Anselm proof of God’s existence by saying " the being than which no greater can be conceived" is impossible to understand. There is no clear and distinct idea of a "being than which no greater can be conceived." He also said that, even a fool is convinced that something exists in the understanding that which nothing greater can be conceived.

Read More
925 Words | 4 Pages

Descartes, and Paley suggest that we can know God and that he is within our understanding. Throughout the readings they describe and argue how we can now the existence of God and the attributes that are associated with him. However David Hume would refute these claims saying through his dialogues more specifically through a character named Philo that we cannot know the attributes or even for that matter the existence. During this paper I will analyze Descartes and Paley’s arguments in comparison with David Hume’s arguments that we cannot know these things. In Paley’s argument he says that if we saw a rock lying on the ground and someone said that rock had always been there that is conceivable, whereas if a watch were lying on the ground that answer would no longer be acceptable.

Read More
1381 Words | 6 Pages

Craig defends the Kalam by using two arguments. Argument one is as follows: Whatever begins to exist has a cause of existence; the universe began to exist; therefore: the universe has a cause. Argument two addresses the cause of existence more specifically and is as follows: Whatever begins to exist has a cause, the universe has a cause; if the universe has a cause, then an uncaused, personal creator of the universe exists.

Read More
945 Words | 4 Pages

St. Anselm and Descartes are known for presenting the first ontological arguments on the existence of God. The word ontological is a compound word derived from ‘ont’ which means exists or being and ‘–ology’ which means the study of. Even though Anselm and Descartes’ arguments differ slightly, they both stem from the same reasoning. Unlike the other two arguments on God’s existence (teleological and cosmological), the ontological argument does not seek to use any empirical evidence but rather concentrates on pure reason. The rationale behind this school of thought

Read More
1744 Words | 7 Pages

Baruch Spinoza’s geometric structured view on the universe, and everything in general, is beautifully broken down for present and future thinkers to ponder in his work, Ethics. Although complex at times, his method of demonstrating each discoveries of proved proposition aids readers to conceptual God-Nature. At the base of these propositions are definitions and axioms (truths) Spinoza accounts as certain truths and are critical to understanding God-Nature (substance). I will here provide an account of Spinoza’s substance monism and attribute pluralism, along with strengths and weaknesses in his arguments for this picture of reality.

Read More

More about Gaunilo's Ontological Argument

Related Topics

Open Document