The second is that if it is possible for God not to exist, i. For if it does not exist, any land which really exists will be more excellent than it; and so the island understood by you to be more excellent will not be more excellent.
God is that which nothing and no being greater is possible. On this view, God is unlike any other reality known to us; while we can easily understand concepts of finite things, the concept of an infinitely great being dwarfs finite human understanding.
Now you should ask: As a matter of fact, yes.
Descartes did much the same thing, only starting from the idea of a perfect being. And from this we conclude that our original assumption was false. What is the Ontological argument for the existence of God.
Therefore, if that than which nothing greater can be conceived exists in the understanding alone, the very being than which nothing greater can be conceived is one than which a greater can be conceived.
For this reason, Premise 2 of Malcolm's version is questionable. This objection says that the concept of God is like the greatest possible integer. But, at any rate, this very fool, when he hears of this being of which I speak - a being than which nothing greater can be conceived - understands what he hears, and what he understands is in his understanding; although he does not understand it to exist.
The problem here is that the qualities that make an island great are not the sort of qualities that admit of conceptually maximal qualities.
Or is there no such nature, since the Fool has said in his heart, there is no God. Both Anselm and the ontological argument in the symbolic logic approach would have us believe that God perfection is not contingent, and that He either exists in all possible worlds or none of them.
One might say, with some intelligibility, that it would be better for oneself or for mankind if God exists than if He does not-but that is a different matter.
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.
Thus, a being that is omniscient lacks the ability to create free beings and is hence not omnipotent. Thus, the very concepts imply that there exist no entities that are both square and circular.
Response It would seem that there are intrinsic maximums for the qualities of God. Anselm begins by contrasting existing in the understanding with existing in reality. Here is his argument for this important claim. Another line of justification could be used.
Being is evidently not a real predicate, that is, a conception of something which is added to the conception of some other thing. But insofar as the relevant great-making properties are limited to omnipotence, omniscience, and moral perfection which do admit of intrinsic maximumsAnselm's notion of a greatest possible being seems to avoid the worry expressed by Broad and Guanilo.
So if it is possible for God defined as maximal perfection, i. Explain Anselm’s ontological argument. The ontological argument was put forth at first as a prayer by the eleventh century monk and philosopher Anselm of Canterbury.
In his Proslogion, which means discourse, he presented this argument as a prayer for believers to substantiate their belief in god.
Anselm’s Ontological Argument for the Existence of God Anselm’s argument is an a priori argument; that is, it is an argument that is independent of experience and based solely on concepts and logical relations, like a mathematical proof. 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. Anselm's argument for the existence of God and is said to be a classic ontological argument.
An ontological argument is a priori argument as it attempts to gather that God exists only by the use of intellectual insight and reasons. The ontological argument asserts God, being defined as most great or perfect, must exist since a God who exists is greater than a God who does not.
It is first mentioned in Anselm's work, the. Anselm's Ontological Argument. Anselm's ontological argument purports to be an a priori proof of God's existence.
Anselm starts with premises that do not depend on experience for their justification and then proceeds by purely logical means to the conclusion that God exists.Explain anselms ontological argument