Essay On Anselm's Ontological Argument

Anselm supported the ontological argument because he wanted to clarify that God exists. Deductive and employing priori reasoning is what defines the ontological argument. It begins a statement that is understood to be correct merely be meaning and instituting a proper conclusion for that statement. By employing deductive reasoning it permits Anselm to display what the meaning means. In this paper I will argue that Anselm’s ontological argument does depend on Anselm’s confidential faith in God.

Anselm was a stable believer in God, so he wanted to use logic and reason to confirm his forceful faith and clarify God’s existence. Anselm’s argument was given in chapter two of Proslogion. Its main focus was the meaning of God. Furthermore he claims that everyone, whether they trust in God or not agrees alongside this definition. Anselm approves there is a difference amid understanding that God exists and understanding him to be a concept. To clarify this extra, he gives the analogy of a painter. He states that, in advance a gifted painter makes a masterpiece; he can discern it visibly in his mind even nevertheless he knows it doesn’t exist. He comprehends it as an idea. Though, after the painting has been finished and can be perceived by the man in reality, the painter comprehends the believed of the painting and its existence. The upcoming period is the locale that an advocate of God who approves alongside Anselm’s argument will be at.

In chapter three there is a somewhat disparate side of the ontological argument. It centers on the nature of God than the meaning of him. Particularly, this chapter centers on the early quality of God that is the fact that he needs to exist. Inanimate things, supplementary living things, and humans are ...

... middle of paper ...

...stence. If this was real God should not be worthy of worship and should not be the biggest conceivable being. A vital God, one whose nonexistence is impossible, is larger than a contingent God whose nonexistence is possible. God has no creator, so to have to have someone else to depend on for attendance, way they are not God. Therefore, we have to accord that God is additionally vital, as well as existent in reality, because to contemplate or else involves a contradiction. The reason for people being able to repudiate the attendance of God is due to them knowing the meaning of the word God, not the attendance of God.

In this paper, I have argued that Anselm’s ontological argument is reliant on Anselm’s confidential faith in God, Anselm by now trust in God, and the argument is plainly and endeavor to change Anselm’s faith into a kind of intellectual understanding.