Ontological argument

Only available on StudyMode
  • Download(s): 22
  • Published: October 7, 2013
Read full document
Text Preview

The “ontological argument” is one of the many to try and support the existence of God. Saint Anselm was the first to develop this argument but Immanuel Kant was the one who gave the name. Ontology is part of branch of metaphysics that is concerned with the nature and relations of being. It attempts to answer questions like, “What is real?” but in Anselm’s case he tries to attempt to answer the question whether or not God is real. The branch where ontology comes from, metaphysics studies the nature and causes of things. Some questions it would attempt to ask are, “Does the soul exist?”

Critics of this argument believe it should be called a “modal” argument since it deals with the concepts of possibility, actuality, and necessity. Anselm defines God by saying He is “that than which none greater can be thought”. This definition could be interpreted by saying God is the greatest possible being. If God did not exist, then we could probably imagine a greater being, a divine being that exists. If something is perfect, then it couldn’t possibly be better than it is. There cannot be anything better than perfection, so if a thing is perfect then it is impossible to imagine it being better than it is. A part of the concept of God is perfection so we must think of God, as a being that cannot be imagined to be than he is. Anselm says to make his definition more clear that it is impossible to conceive either of there being anything greater than God or of it being possible to imagine God better than he already is. But as stated by Anselm there is none greater than God, then it follows that He exists. This argument is on God’s existence is based on reason entirely. And according to the argument, there is no need to go out looking for physical evidence of God’s existence; but we know He exists by thinking about it. Some philosophers call these arguments a “priori” argument. I personally do not think this argument is convincing because he treats the existence as...
tracking img