For centuries, scholars have debated Anselm's Ontological Argument. St. Anselm purportedly originated the argument during his life time from the eleventh-twelfth centuries A.D. Although much controversy surrounds the argument, the argument contributed a significant legacy to the history of Philosophy.
In a priori fashion, Anselm's Ontological Argument attempts to prove the existence of God. The arguments start by deeming God the greatest thought of which could be thought. Therefore, God exists as an idea in any individual subject. However, an idea that also exists in reality is much greater than a mere subjective idea. If we confine God only to the mind, then we can think of something greater than God. Since no thought is greater than God, it necessarily follows that God must exist.
Although the syllogism is straight-forward, many contested the argument's value. A contemporary critic of Anselm, Gaunilo of Marmoutier, saw the argument as ludicrous. He posed that one could replace the concept of God with some fictitious island, which, as a result, would prove the existence of a clearly fictitious island. Gaunilo's argument fails, however, because the concept of an island does not presuppose ultimate ideals such as infinity, eternity, and the like, but we easily understand Gaunilo's point.
Some years later, the scholastic St. Thomas Aquinas clearly rendered St. Anselm's Ontological Argument much less effective. Aquinas countered by noting that Anselm rhetoric only persuaded those who already conceived God as the greatest idea of which could be thought. Aquinas suggested that many different thinkers think of God in different ways, and as a result, could not begin with Anselm's initial premise.
Immanuel Kant, some centuries later, very strongly opposed the St. Anselm's Ontological Argument. He contended that existence cannot be a predicate of an idea. For if an idea produced or caused existence, the preceding idea could not exist because existence occurs after the fact. Heidegger would similarly deem this a type of onto-theology.
Many other critiques exist as well. David Hume might, for example, conclude that the argument does prove the existence of God because all a priori arguments are necessarily valid. However, Hume rejected a priori arguments as sound epistemological justifications.
The argument faces critique other than soundness. The argument too implies a certain dualism, where ideas and reality come to exist in two separate realms of existence.
Although many scholars pounded Anselm's Ontological Argument, they certainly recognized its power, its persuasive rhetoric, and its simplicity. The Ontological Argument illustrates the power of deductive arguments, contributed a great deal of consequential debate on the concept of God, and highlights metaphysical paradoxes.
In a priori fashion, Anselm's Ontological Argument attempts to prove the existence of God. The arguments start by deeming God the greatest thought of which could be thought. Therefore, God exists as an idea in any individual subject. However, an idea that also exists in reality is much greater than a mere subjective idea. If we confine God only to the mind, then we can think of something greater than God. Since no thought is greater than God, it necessarily follows that God must exist.
Although the syllogism is straight-forward, many contested the argument's value. A contemporary critic of Anselm, Gaunilo of Marmoutier, saw the argument as ludicrous. He posed that one could replace the concept of God with some fictitious island, which, as a result, would prove the existence of a clearly fictitious island. Gaunilo's argument fails, however, because the concept of an island does not presuppose ultimate ideals such as infinity, eternity, and the like, but we easily understand Gaunilo's point.
Some years later, the scholastic St. Thomas Aquinas clearly rendered St. Anselm's Ontological Argument much less effective. Aquinas countered by noting that Anselm rhetoric only persuaded those who already conceived God as the greatest idea of which could be thought. Aquinas suggested that many different thinkers think of God in different ways, and as a result, could not begin with Anselm's initial premise.
Immanuel Kant, some centuries later, very strongly opposed the St. Anselm's Ontological Argument. He contended that existence cannot be a predicate of an idea. For if an idea produced or caused existence, the preceding idea could not exist because existence occurs after the fact. Heidegger would similarly deem this a type of onto-theology.
Many other critiques exist as well. David Hume might, for example, conclude that the argument does prove the existence of God because all a priori arguments are necessarily valid. However, Hume rejected a priori arguments as sound epistemological justifications.
The argument faces critique other than soundness. The argument too implies a certain dualism, where ideas and reality come to exist in two separate realms of existence.
Although many scholars pounded Anselm's Ontological Argument, they certainly recognized its power, its persuasive rhetoric, and its simplicity. The Ontological Argument illustrates the power of deductive arguments, contributed a great deal of consequential debate on the concept of God, and highlights metaphysical paradoxes.
About the Author:
More Anselm and Philosophy at Best Philosophy Books, and find more Anselm resources at Anselm's Ontological Argument.
No comments:
Post a Comment