Normally, existential claims don't follow from conceptual claims.If I want to prove that bachelors, unicorns, or viruses exist, it is not enough just to reflect on the concepts.Likewise, cosmological arguments depend on certain empirical claims about the explanation for the occurrence of empirical events.
Normally, existential claims don't follow from conceptual claims.If I want to prove that bachelors, unicorns, or viruses exist, it is not enough just to reflect on the concepts.Likewise, cosmological arguments depend on certain empirical claims about the explanation for the occurrence of empirical events.Tags: Persuasive Essay About SeasonsProblem Solving Assessment QuestionsDoctoral Theological Thesis SubjectsMonster EssayScholarship Essay Questions And AnswersLearn How To Write An EssayCreative Writing Essay ContestCover Letter For A Law Internship
The argument in this difficult passage can accurately be summarized in standard form: Intuitively, one can think of the argument as being powered by two ideas.
The first, expressed by Premise 2, is that we have a coherent idea of a being that instantiates all of the perfections.
In the following sections, we will evaluate a number of different attempts to develop this astonishing strategy. Anselm, Archbishop of Cantebury (1033-1109), is the originator of the ontological argument, which he describes in the as follows: [Even a] fool, when he hears of …
a being than which nothing greater can be conceived …
As the objection is sometimes put, Anselm simply defines things into existence-and this cannot be done.
Gaunilo shared this worry, believing that one could use Anselm's argument to show the existence of all kinds of non-existent things: Now if some one should tell me that there is …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.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." Gaunilo's argument, thus, proceeds by attempting to use Anselm's strategy to deduce the existence of a perfect island, which Gaunilo rightly views as a counterexample to the argument form.The ontological argument, then, is unique among such arguments in that it purports to establish the real (as opposed to abstract) existence of some entity.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.We can do so merely by consulting the definition and seeing that it is self-contradictory.Thus, the very concepts imply that there exist no entities that are both square and circular.Thus, on this general line of argument, it is a necessary truth that such a being exists; and this being is the God of traditional Western theism.This article explains and evaluates classic and contemporary versions of the ontological argument.For suppose it exists in the understanding alone: then it can be conceived to exist in reality; which is greater.…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. Hence, there is no doubt that there exists a being, than which nothing greater can be conceived, and it exists both in the understanding and in reality.