Post by jollyjacobite on Jul 20, 2020 2:21:12 GMT
St Anselm, the 11th century archbishop of Canterbury, sought to create an argument that would itself alone suffice to prove God's existence.
According to his biographer he was so intent on devising such an argument that even the fool could grasp that he would go without food and sleep. One night the argument came to him which we now know as the ontological argument. Its simplicity has often been pilloried and parodied by Atheists. Many permutations of his original ontological argument have been proffered by Descartes, Plantinga, and others.
Anselm's argument has been rendered in syllogistic form by the The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy as follows:
Do you find his argument sound and compelling? Or do you agree with the criticisms of St Thomas Aquinas, Immanuel Kant, and/or the New Atheists?
"I began to ask myself whether there might be found a single argument which would require no other for its proof than itself alone, and alone would suffice to demonstrate that God truly exists." (Preface to the Proslogion)
According to his biographer he was so intent on devising such an argument that even the fool could grasp that he would go without food and sleep. One night the argument came to him which we now know as the ontological argument. Its simplicity has often been pilloried and parodied by Atheists. Many permutations of his original ontological argument have been proffered by Descartes, Plantinga, and others.
Anselm's argument has been rendered in syllogistic form by the The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy as follows:
1. It is a conceptual truth (or, so to speak, true by definition) that God is a being than which none greater can be imagined (that is, the greatest possible being that can be imagined).
2. God exists as an idea in the mind.
3. 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.
4. Thus, if God exists only as an idea in the mind, then we can imagine something that is greater than God (that is, a greatest possible being that does exist).
5. But we cannot imagine something that is greater than God (for it is a contradiction to suppose that we can imagine a being greater than the greatest possible being that can be imagined.)
6. Therefore, God exists.
2. God exists as an idea in the mind.
3. 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.
4. Thus, if God exists only as an idea in the mind, then we can imagine something that is greater than God (that is, a greatest possible being that does exist).
5. But we cannot imagine something that is greater than God (for it is a contradiction to suppose that we can imagine a being greater than the greatest possible being that can be imagined.)
6. Therefore, God exists.
Do you find his argument sound and compelling? Or do you agree with the criticisms of St Thomas Aquinas, Immanuel Kant, and/or the New Atheists?