St. Anselm's Ontological Argument

Ontological Argument of St. Anselm St. Anselm was a philosopher who proposed the first ontological argument in Western Christian tradition back in 1078 through his work Proslogian. An ontological argument is “an argument aiming to prove the existence of God through just thought of God alone” (Timmons 439). St. Anselm believed the definition of God to be, “That than which nothing greater can be conceived.” While Anselm argued God’s existence was purely through introspection, it can be disputed that just rationalization of God in one’s mind alone cannot contrive his existence in reality. Anselm wrote Proslogian as a prayer that’s purpose was to cast light on all of God’s qualities and goes into explain how God can have skills that are often …show more content…
Anselm presented his argument in the second and third chapters of Proslogian. In chapter 2, Anselm says that God being than which none greater can be imagined is a conceptual truth. He acknowledged that a being that is present in both mind and reality is much greater than a being that exists only in the mind. Hence, if God only exists as an idea in the mind, we can think of something that is greater than God. We can think of the greatest possible being that does exist. This is a contradiction Anselm says. He says that we cannot think of something that is greater than God, for he is the greatest being of all. With this deductive reasoning, Anselm believes God is existent. In Chapter 3, he supports his topic in a different view. He says that a being that exists in reality is greater than a being that doesn’t exist in reality. Anselm states that by definition, “if God exists as an idea in the mind but not in reality, something greater is there.” Again he says that this is impossible. If God exists as an idea in the mind, God exists in reality. Since God exist in the mind, god exists in …show more content…
Anselm covered two bases on how God’s existence became self-evident in Proslogian, but left many counterarguments open. It seems as if an ontological argument can be used to prove the existence of everything. While his use of syllogism creates a valid conclusion, his premises leave openings for other conclusions. For example, we could take his first premise, which states if the greatest being exists in the mind, it must exist in reality and apply it to something else. What if we don’t believe in his definition of God? Then we could say that in our mind existed a perfect anything. Since it was present in our mind, it must be in reality. Also, we can challenge this argument through an evidence standpoint alone. How can there be a God if he has never shown his face? How can we believe in something we can’t see? St. Anselm did not support his argument with evidential support; instead he used a priori justification. With this theory, St. Anselm unintentionally meant that anything can exist necessarily and we both know that is not true. He also inadvertently comes up with the idea that existing adds something to the being. “Existence cannot function as a predicate” (Himma). Why must something have to exist in reality for it to actually be there? Existing adds nothing to a being including perfection which means that a perfect being can be created without having to exist in reality. The ontological argument we know today was shaped by “Anselm’s first ontological argument, the