Ontological arguments are a priori, which show that God exists without appealing to a sense experience. These ontological arguments argue about what God is to where he is from. St. Anselm, the creator of the ontological argument, based his theory on that we cannot think of anything greater than God. Therefor God must exist, why you might ask? If the greatest thing that we can conceive does not exist than we can still conceive the greatest thing that does exist, and that would be God.
The best explanation to the existence of God through St. Aquinas’s argument is that God does not exist as the first efficient cause. The argument for God, as presented by St. Aquinas, attempts to show that the existence of the world and everything within it can only be explained if there is a God who is the first efficient cause. The argument states that it is impossible for any being to be the efficient cause of itself because then it would have to bring itself into being, and to bring itself into being, it would have to exist before it existed. If a being exists, it is because some being before it caused it to exist. Therefore, if no first cause exists, neither will any other being exist.
Aquinas has been a firm believer that everything had to have a creator and the only possible solution would be something called God. It is with this idea that Aquinas's Third Way was written. In his De aeternitate mundi contra murmurantes, Aquinas insists that human reason cannot prove the impossibility of an eternally created universe. Once again Aquinas has written with the certainty that God has to exist in order to have created the universe. There is no doubt in Aquinas's mind that everything was created for a reason and that reason was God's will.
The Cosmological Argument attempts to prove that God exists by showing that there cannot be an infinite number of regressions of causes to things that exist. It states that there must be a final uncaused-cause of all things. This uncaused-cause is asserted to be God. Arguments like this are thought up to recognize why we and the universe exist. The Cosmological Argument takes several forms but is basically represented below.
Spinoza’s method of proving one substance relies upon his definitions and reason. I take further issue with this method because God cannot be proven through reason alone. Through this same reasoning Spinoza gives life too much meaning. In his argument, he claims that since God is the only substance all things flow from God. Meaning that everything in existence is a part of
In Anselm’s Ontological Argument, he is trying to prove that God exists. He used two preconditions to prove this argument. The first precondition is the important idea of this argument, he said that because the greatest things not only exist in the mind, but it also exists in the reality. The second precondition is that there is nothing greater than God can be conceived. So the conclusion for this argument is that God exists.
The ontological argument argues that if you understand what it means to talk about God, you will see His existence is necessarily true. Anselm defined God as 'that than which nothing greater can be conceived', hence God must exist. Anselm also believed that even atheist had a definition for God even just to disregard his existence; hence God exists in the mind. Anselm said this is so because that which exists in reality is greater than that which exists purely in the mind. In the words of Anselm, "Therefore, Lord, not only are You that than which nothing greater can be conceived but you are also something greater than can be conceived.
In this paper, I will explain how Descartes uses the existence of himself to prove the existence of God. The “idea of God is in my mind” is based on “I think, therefore I am”, so there is a question arises: “do I derive my existence? Why, from myself, or from my parents, or from whatever other things there are that are less perfect than God. For nothing more perfect than God, or even as perfect as God, can be thought or imagined.” (Descartes 32, 48) Descartes investigates his reasons to show that he, his parents and other causes cannot cause the existence of himself. I do not cause the existence of myself Descartes illustrates “I am not the reason I exist” from two perspectives: (1)Direct reason: If I am the reason I exist, it has an incredible conclusion “if I got my being from myself, I would not doubt, nor would I desire, nor would I lack anything at all.
The second argument was by Epicurus, He believed that if there is a God he should be able to prevent future evil in the world that God can stop evil and chooses not to stop it. I think, in my opinion, agree with people who argue in believe of God's existence. In conclusion, we have seen on the basis of both philosophical argument and scientific confirmation that it is plausible that the universe began to exists. Given the intuitively obvious principle that the universe has a cause of its existence. On the basis of our argument, this cause would have to do uncaused, eternal, changeless, timeless, and immaterial.
In this paper, I will examine the ontological argument of Anselm for the existence of God. Anselm defines God as “that-than-which-nothing-greater-can-be-thought,” which means, at least for Anselm, that God must exist because he is the greatest being that can be conceived. Furthermore, he argues that all people, whether or not they believe in the existence of God, at least understand his definition, including the fool who denies that God exist. Anselm, in addition to that, describes two main differences between understanding the definition of God, and understanding God to exist. In the explanation of this argument for the existence of God, Anselm states that God is the greatest being that can be thought and nothing else can be conceived as a greater being than God.