The Ontological Argument Essay -- social issues

The ontological Argument The Ontological line of business is a group of different philosophers arguments for the existence of god. Ontological literally means talking about being and so in this case, that being is the existence or being of God. The main component of the Ontological argument can be found in the Anselms Proslogion which is a short work that tries to demonstrate both the existence and the nature of God. His main aim in writing the Proslogion is non to directly prove the existence of God but to moreover, to show the relationship between faith and terra firma. Anselm wanted to understand the object of the belief. He is also not trying to defend his belief against the atheist and neither is he trying to convince the atheist that God exists. The ontological argument differs from some other arguments in choose of God as it is an a priori deductive argument, a priori meaning that can come to a conclusion by the use of reason and not proof. A deductive argument means tha t if the premises that are put into the argument are true, then the conclusion must be true. Thus, Anselm tends to ignorant his argument on the definitions and terminology used. Anselms first form of the argument is that God is that than which none greater can be conceived. Firstly, it must be exclamatory that Anselms definition does not limit God to being the greatest but makes it known that nothing greater can be idea 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. Anselm uses the theoretical account of the fool to prove his point on Gods existence. He says that when the fool says that There is no God in Psalms, he must because understand what he hears , and what he understands in his intellect by the term God. Therefore, if he knows what God is, God must exist as it is impractical to know what something is if it does not exist. In chapter three in the Proslogion, Anselm contributes his second form to the argument. This form of the argument is that of necessary existence. He says that that than which can be thought not to exist is not as great as that which cannot be thought not to exist. Therefore, to say that God can be thought not to exist if the definition of God... ...elms first form of the argument and indirectly also demolishes the argument on the necessary existence though his criticism. He criticises and successfully attacks the Cartesian version that in order for there to be a self-governing being, existence must be predicate of God (the supreme being). Norman Malcolm then tried to save this argument by coming up with an argument which Davis seems to have demolished successfully. Although the argument does not seem to confront too strong in the light of these responses, we can say that although Anselm failed to show the fool that God existed, he by acquiring more knowledge and collar about the Christian beliefs seems to fortify his faith as a believer. Anselms second form of the argument seems has kept philosophers interested and fascinated with it throughout time. The in truth fact that philosophers such as Descartes, Kant, Malcolm have been intrigued by the ontological argument strongly shows that it is a very important and complex argument which is in favour of the existence of God. Although a final and ultimate answer to the question of Gods existence has yet to be attained, it is still considered to be a noteworthy argument.