Response To Anselm's Ontological Argument
In the “Proslogion” Anselm argues God as the greatest conceivable being that exists in reality. In this essay, I will show that Anselm’s ontological argument is sound and his conclusion logically follows from his premises. I will consider an objection towards Anselm’s definition of God and show that it is unconvincing and flawed. The objection against Anselm’s ontological argument that I will consider will be one brought up by a contemporary of Anselm, Gauinilo. His objection was that if you were to take Anselm’s logic of existence then you can infer anything into existence (essentially parallel arguments). I shall consider Anselm’s response as well as my response to the objection. I will conclude that Anselm’s ontological argument is
…show more content…
Anselm, then posits a question of whether something of this nature exists, to which he builds an argument on the basis that if a person understands what it is meant by the term God then that person is motivated to the proposition that God exists. He argues that regardless of whether you believe in the existence of God or not you understand what is meant by the term God. To assert this point Anselm says even the fool (non-believer) when hearing the definition “understands what he hears, and what he understands exists in his understanding- even if he doesn’t think it exists.” He then makes the clear distinction that it is different for something to exist in understanding and to exist in reality. He furthers this point by using the analogy of the Painter who understands (in his …show more content…
God is by definition “something than which nothing which is greater can be conceived”
2. We can conceive of the definition, therefore God exists in our understanding
3. Existing in reality and understanding is greater than existing in understanding alone
4. By definition God then must exist in reality as well as understanding
“If something exists in the understanding alone, but can be conceived to exist in reality, then that thing can be conceived to be greater than it actually is.” Which by definition is a contradiction because God is the greatest conceivable being
5. God can be conceived to exist in something greater than understanding
Therefore P2 is false
6. Therefore God exists in reality (and
Anselm, then posits a question of whether something of this nature exists, to which he builds an argument on the basis that if a person understands what it is meant by the term God then that person is motivated to the proposition that God exists. He argues that regardless of whether you believe in the existence of God or not you understand what is meant by the term God. To assert this point Anselm says even the fool (non-believer) when hearing the definition “understands what he hears, and what he understands exists in his understanding- even if he doesn’t think it exists.” He then makes the clear distinction that it is different for something to exist in understanding and to exist in reality. He furthers this point by using the analogy of the Painter who understands (in his …show more content…
God is by definition “something than which nothing which is greater can be conceived”
2. We can conceive of the definition, therefore God exists in our understanding
3. Existing in reality and understanding is greater than existing in understanding alone
4. By definition God then must exist in reality as well as understanding
“If something exists in the understanding alone, but can be conceived to exist in reality, then that thing can be conceived to be greater than it actually is.” Which by definition is a contradiction because God is the greatest conceivable being
5. God can be conceived to exist in something greater than understanding
Therefore P2 is false
6. Therefore God exists in reality (and