I will then try to argue that existence is a perfection and that as a predicate for God, existence reveal certain true about God. Ontological argument tries to prove the existence of God from a priori perspective, i.e., idea implanted in the human mind by God himself. The argument therefore depends on analytic reasoning, from premise to conclusion. Descartes believes that he has an inborn idea which he calls “innate” (p. 43). His ability to think did not cause the idea on his mind, but God’s free will to act.
He proposed his argument for God’s existence. His ontological argument is based on the thought of God as the highest being. Anselm’s argument is different from other philosophers simply because of it’s premise. He saw a need for a precise logical philosophy as a way for making faith mature, not as a substitute for faith. Because Anselm already believed in God, he was only looking for rational support for this belief.
In Anselm’s “Proslogion” and Descartes’ “ Meditations on First Philosophy,” Anselm and Descartes offer their own answers to one of the most important questions in life, which is whether God exists. I will point out similarities and differences in the two arguments, and I will argue why Descartes ‘proof’ is more persuasive. Anselm’s argument for the existence of God is quite simple. He first proclaims that humans can grasp in their mind “something than which nothing greater can be thought” (Anselm 7). This “something” is an all-perfect God.
Such a truth is also indubitable. It should be stated out here that he was thinking not so much in the order of existence but r... ... middle of paper ... ...e. He argues that the essence of God implies the existence of God. While the idea of God is present to the human mind, it is different from other ideas because such an idea is that of a supremely perfect being. God would not be a perfect being if there was the impossibility of his existence. Consequently, God’s existence cannot be separated from His essence.
Descartes says, “I must examine whether there is a God, and, if there is, whether he can be a deceiver. Descartes has to prove that God exists and that he is no deceiver. Descartes then explains that the idea of God is the idea of a perfect or Supreme Being. A perfect being could have set this idea in our minds. He discovers that a perfect thing exists and that perfect being is defined as God.
Thus, Anselm tends to base his argument on the definitions and terminology used. Anselm’s first form of the argument is that God is "that than which none greater can be conceived". Firstly, it must be emphasised that Anselm’s definition does not limit God to being the "greatest" but makes it known that nothing greater can be thought than God himself. Therefore, God should not in any way be linked to terms such as ‘omnipotent’ as terminology such as this limit him to what he really is. With this definition, he attempts to prove that not only does God exist in the mind but also in reality.
In the New Merriam Webster Dictionary, sophism is defined as a plausible but fallacious argument. In Rene Descartes Meditation V, he distinguishes the existence of God, believing he must prove that god exists before he can examine any corporeal objects outside of himself. By proving that the existence of God is not a sophism, he also argues that God is therefore the Supreme Being and the omnipotent one. His conclusion that God does exist enables him to prove the existence of material things, and the difference between the soul and the body. Ideas, innovations, and inventions are all created from brilliant minds.
This essay argues that the world's authorship should be assigned to God given his omnipotence, and will show that it is logical and necessary for him to sustain it having created it. Firstly, it must be noted that in certain scenarios this essay will assume that one of the other Judaeo-Christian attributes of God is a fact, because there is not time to prove their necessity here. However, if the proof is a crux of my argument, it will be dealt with. Creatorship is an absolutely essential attribute of God in any religion but especially the Judaeo-Christian perspective. This is because, if God did not create, then who did and what power does God in fact have?
One must definitely consider the epistemological questions, or the "How do we know what we know?" questions. One must also consider how God should be defined, especially since the definition and concept of God is so central to Anselm's point. I take the position that knowledge is belief that is reasonably and logically supported. Knowledge approaches truth, or the actuality, but is not necessarily true.
Anselm seeks to find God with such fervor, such tenacity, that the only thing he accomplishes is not an understanding of God, but an understanding of his faith in God. The ontological argument in this respect is not important, but the actual search for Anselm’s “Creator” is imperative (1). Anselm was made to “behold God” and yet, he says “I never unto this day done that for the sake whereof I was created” (1). There is much more than a conceived God in the Proslogion.