Actual Proof Of God's Existence example essay topic

Anselm's Ontological Argument Anselm " sAnselm's Ontological Argument Essay, Research Paper Anselm's Ontological Argument Saint Anselm's ontological argument seeks to provide an a priori proof (proposition which can be known or justified independent of experience) of God's existence. However, Gaunilo, a contemporary of Anselm and a fellow Catholic, argued that Anselm's ontological argument is invalid, because an argument of the same form could have true premises and a false conclusion therefore, he introduced perfect island argument which is perfectly parallel to ontological argument. In this paper, I will discuss St. Anselm's ontological argument and how Gaunilo used his perfect island argument as an objection to Anselm. In addition to this, I will briefly discuss Anselm's replies to Gaunilo's criticisms Anselm's definition of God is "? You are something that nothing greater can be conceived. ' (Anselm 127) Anselm's statement essentially means that it is not possible to think of being greater than God.

Anselm also states that God is the greatest thinkable being, he is referring to the fact that it would be impossible to imagine or to create in ones mind someone or something being better than God. Therefore, it would be impossible to say that God only exists in ones mind because it is much greater to exist in reality than it is to exist only in ones mind. Later, Anselm suggested that God has many attributes which describe him. Among these being: self-existent, a necessary being, omnipotent, omniscient, completely just, and timelessly eternal however, the most important attributes is the fact that he is self-existent. In essence, that means that God depends on nothing else for his existence, he is uncaused. Therefore, his existence is timelessly eternal.

This means that God cannot stop existing. On the other hand, contingent beings (such as ourselves) depend on something else for their existence. One example of this is 1 that as a child we utterly depended on our parents for food, clothing, and shelter. Contingent beings therefore can begin to be or cease to be at anytime. They can, unlike God, be here today and gone tomorrow.

Anselm uses the definition of God, which I have described above, to prove God's existence. Now, let's look at the premises; 1. God is the GCB (Greatest conceivable being) 2. God exists or doesn't exist 3. Assume God doesn't exist 4.

If God does not exist then the GCB does not exist 5. You can conceive of existence GCB 6. But an exiting GCB is greater than a non-existing GCB 7. But nothing can be greater than the GCB Anselm believes that God is the greatest being we can possibly think of. He does this by first trying to prove the opposite of what he really wants to prove. For example, in premise three lets suppose God does not exist in reality.

Now, we could think of something greater, a being that has all the same virtuous characteristics as we think God has, but also being able to exist in reality. He then tries to prove that this supposition leads to a conclusion, which cannot possibly be true. Then the original God would not be the greatest thinkable being, this new something else, that actually exists would be. This new God who actually exists would then be able to be seen, heard and touched by the individuals who believe he exists as the greatest thinkable being.

Nevertheless, it is obviously impossible that the greatest being we can think of should not be the greatest being we could think. Therefore, the conclusion that God does not exist must be false. Anselm then believes that the opposite of this supposition must be true therefore, God exists. A 2 perfect God must exist in reality. Otherwise, God would not be totally perfect.

Existence is perfection. ' For it is one thing for a thing to stand in relation to our understanding; it is another thing for us to understand that it really exists. ' (Anselm 127) A modern day example of Anselm's theory is that if I can really imagine a perfect guy for me. This guy would actually exist somewhere in the world. A guy with all of the best qualities that I can possibly think of or can imagine in other words, he would be everything that I am looking for. According to Anselm's beliefs, he would most defiantly exist.

Anselm uses God's definition to argue that "? it is impossible to think of it as not existing. ' (Anselm 27) Now, let's look at the Gaunilo's argument, which is perfect parallel to Anselm's argument. Gaunilo's perfect island argument is basically about an island (somewhere in the ocean) which is said to be, "? more abundantly filled with inestimable riches and delights than the Isles of the Blessed, and that although it has no owner or inhabitant, it excels all the lands that men inhabit taken together in the unceasing abundance of it's fertility. ' (Gaunilo 128) This description of the island give clear picture in one's mind and person can easily imagine how this island would look but, if someone say that this island exists without a doubt, ? some should wish by this argument to demonstrate to me that this island truly exists and is no longer to be doubted, I would think he were joking; or, if I accepted the argument, I do not know whom I would regard as the greater fool, me for accepting it or him for supposing that he had proved the existence of this island with any kind of certainty. (Gaunilo 129) 3 Now, just to have better understanding what is going on let's look at the both arguments' premises; Anselm's argumentGaunilo's perfect island objection 1. God is GCB 1.

P-island is GCI 2. God exists or does not exist 2. P-island exist or does not exist 3. Assume God doesn't exist 3. Assume island doesn't exist 4. You can conceive of an existing GCB 4.

You can conceive of an existing GCB however, it is impossible to conceive of an existing GCI since there is no infinite size than the conclusion is false. Also, Premise one, Perfect Island is finite and GCI is infinite this leads to false conclusion as well since these two can't be at the same time. Anselm replies to Gaunilo's criticism that his argument applies to God, GCB not to p-island, GCI. Sober mentioned on page 86 that Gaunilo is informing that there is mistake in Anselm's argument however, he does not point out that where mistake really occurs and same in Anselm's reply he fail to point out the mistake in Gaunilo's p-island argument.

Than later Gaunilo replies to Anselm, It should be proved by some most certain argument that some superior reality, that is, a nature which is greater and better than everything that is, a nature which is greater and better than everything that is, actually exits. From this we can then prove all the other qualities which must not be lacking from that which is greater and better than all things. (Gaunilo 129) 4 Anselm replies to that "? same thing cannot be both conceived and not conceived at the same time. ' Than moving on with his reply Anselm added, "what he is conceiving must necessarily exist, because whatever is able not to exist is not that of which he is conceiving. ' In conclusion, Ontological argument by Anselm's and Gaunilo's perfect island objection is perfect parallel however, Gaunilo's argument fail to prove eventhough, all of the premises are true but since there is no infinite size so, the conclusion is wrong. However, on the other hand side Anselm's conclusion is true that God is GCB, but it does not prove that God exists.

Lastly, whether Anselm's definition of God gives actual proof of God's existence or not, I believe that the only way to believe that God actually exists is to have true faith in him..