There is, then, so truly a being than which nothing greater can be conceived to exist, that it cannot even be conceived not to exist; and this being thou art, O Lord, our God. This conception of God as having necessary existence is in keeping with God as He appears in religion — the God of scripture is almighty and everlasting, and the creator of all things — such a being cannot be thought of as being brought into existence or as depending on anything else for existence.
Whatever we conceive as existent, we can also conceive as non-existent. This distinguishes the claim that x exists from the claim that x necessarily exists and hence seems to imply that the latter, and only the latter, expresses a property.
And in Him there is no room for non-existence or imperfection. Nothing is more perfect than Him. If an unlimited being does not exist in W, then its nonexistence cannot be explained by reference to any causally contingent feature of W; accordingly, there is no contingent feature of W that explains why that being doesn't exist.
Assess the ontological argument we cannot imagine an island that is greater than a piland. Non-existence, Gasking asserts, would be the greatest handicap.
Therefore, God necessarily exists in reality. Therefore, according to his nature, God must exist. And, as it has already been explicated, perfection is prior to imperfection, actuality to potency, and existence to non-existence. From our perspective, Assess the ontological argument is simply nothing to be gained by adding transworld indestructibility to a set of dishes that is actually indestructible.
Therefore, God must exist. To accept on the one hand that God is 'that than which no greater can be conceived' and then to say that God doesn't exist is to make a logical error.
If a maximally great being exists in one logically possible world, it exists in every logically possible world. My future child will be a better man if he is honest than if he is not; but who would understand the saying that he will be a better man if he exists than if he does not?
It makes sense and is true to say that my future house will be a better one if it is insulated than if it is not insulated; but what could it mean to say that it will be a better house if it exists than if it does not?
But if a person p who does A at t has the ability to do other than A at t, then it follows that p has the ability to bring it about that an omniscient God has a false belief - and this is clearly impossible.
Gaunilo of Marmoutier gave an immediate response to this. He argues that the ontological argument works only if existence is a predicate; if this is not so, he claims the ontological argument is invalidated, as it is then conceivable a completely perfect being doesn't exist.
And since it is more excellent not to be in the understanding alone, but to exist both in the understanding and in reality, for this reason it must exist. Thus he argues that, if the proposition "X exists" is posited, it would follow that, if X exists, it exists necessarily; this does not mean that X exists in reality.
Premise 3 asserts that existence is a perfection or great-making property.
Indeed, if the ontological arguments succeed, it is as much a contradiction to suppose that God doesn't exist as it is to suppose that there are square circles or female bachelors.
Paul Oppenheimer and Edward N. Hence, if that, than which nothing greater can be conceived, can be conceived not to exist, it is not that, than which nothing greater can be conceived.
The property of being God-like is consistent Theorem 2: For example, moral perfection is thought to entail being both perfectly merciful and perfectly just.
He suggested that the concept of God is that of a supremely perfect being, holding all perfections. Be that as it may Gaunilo's argument is unable to oppose Anselm's because an island relies upon other things for it to exist and as Plantinga mentions an island has no intrinsic maximum Jordan et al PL4 If "A maximally great being exists" is possible, then "A maximally great being exists" is necessarily true.
Thus, if the notion of God did not include existence, it would not be supremely perfect, as it would be lacking a perfection. The problem of divine foreknowledge can also be seen as denying that omniscience, omnipotence, and moral perfection constitute a coherent set.
According to Craig, premises 2 — 5 are relatively uncontroversial among philosophers, but "the epistemic entertainability of premise 1 or its denial does not guarantee its metaphysical possibility.
A being that exists as an idea in the mind and in reality is, other things being equal, greater than a being that exists only as an idea in the mind. The existence of an unlimited being is either logically necessary or logically impossible.Topics: Ontology, Ontological argument, Existence Pages: 3 ( words) Published: March 14, Ontological Argument One of the most fascinating arguments for the existence of an all-perfect God is the ontological argument.
An ontological argument is a philosophical argument for the existence of God that uses ontology.
Many arguments fall under the category of the ontological, and they tend to involve arguments about the state of being or existing. More specifically. Advantages. There is no need for empirical evidence to prove God's existence. A strength of an a priori argument is that if you accept the premise then the conclusion must be true as it is logically necessary.
Anselm: Ontological Argument for God's Existence One of the most fascinating arguments for the existence of an all-perfect God is the ontological argument. While there are several different versions of the argument, all purport to show that it is self-contradictory to.
Mar 23, · Evaluate Anselm’s Ontological Argument for the Existence of God. The Ontological Argument for the existence of God is the only a priori argument for God’s existence; it attempts to show that if you reflect properly on the nature of God you will find that He must exist.
The ontological argument was first formulated by St. Anselm in the 11th century. It argues the existence of God from a deductive and a priori stance. God is a being than which none greater can be conceived.Download