• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

The Ontological Argument Will Never Be Any Use In Trying To Prove Gods Existence Discuss

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

(b): "The Ontological Argument will never be any use in trying to prove God's existence" Discuss (10 marks) As an a priori proof, it one would assume that the Ontological Argument can very effectively prove God's existence to both theists and atheists. However, this is, clearly, not the case. It can, also be argued that to prove God's existence, you need only prove it to an atheist as a theist would already believe in His existence in their hearts. A theist may welcome proof for God's existence, and very strongly support and believe in it, but they will not need it, as they will feel that they do not need proof for something that they already know to be true. An atheist, on the other hand, does not believe in God. They may believe that the natural world is all there is and so any legitimate proof, in their eyes, will be very hard to come by. Therefore, any sort of a proof given to an atheist may be explained by them through nature or, indeed, questionable in its logic, as God is to them. ...read more.

Middle

This is because using Anselm's logic, you seem to be able to define anything into existence. This is clearly not the case in real life, as we cannot simply say that there is a cake that tastes better than any other. It is surely better to exist both in the mind and in reality as opposed to just the mind. Therefore, my cake, the best tasting cake, must exist in front of me. If this were so, the world would not make sense, but it does, and so this reasoning is false. In response to this, Anselm refined his first argument for God's existence, and put forward a second version, in which he felt that he had overcome Gaunilo's objection. In this version, Anselm states that: "It can be conceived that something exist that cannot be thought not to exist. God must be such a thing if He is 'that than which nothing greater can be conceived'. This is because something that can be thought not to exist would be inferior to that which cannot." ...read more.

Conclusion

Therefore, God's existence is necessary". This argument is one that takes into account all of the criticisms of the previous arguments and creates a strong and sound argument that makes logical, deductive sense. However, even Malcolm feels that "one can view the argument as a piece of logic, following the deductive moves but not being touched seriously". This shows that although it can show how God exists, it doesn't cause a conversion in faith in an atheist's mind. Overall, I feel that Ontological Arguments can be used very effectively, even Anselm's arguments, to prove God's existence, but only to a theist, not an atheist, as it was made for "faith seeking understanding". It cannot be used, I feel, by an atheist to convert them to theism, as conversion comes from the heart and not the mind, as using these arguments on atheists seems to imply. I do, however, feel that the Ontological Arguments for the existence of God will never be any use to prove God's existence to an atheist, not a theist. ?? ?? ?? ?? Ammara Khan L6.06 / 12D Ms Harbutt ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Philosophy section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Philosophy essays

  1. Analyze the distinctive features of the Ontological Argument

    Even if we could perceive of perfection that would not mean that God necessarily existed. There are problems with the definition of perfection, which is subjective and there are problems with saying that existence is part of perfection. Saying one exists does not add any value to the understanding of one as Kant argued.

  2. The Ontological Argument - Critique

    be thought of as God if he does not exist; Kant offered 2 criticisms of the ontological argument provided by Descartes, his first relates mainly to the analogy above: we may agree that, for God to truly be God, he must exist, however this does not prove in any such

  1. Compare and contrast the contributions of Descartes and Humes on the issue of the ...

    However others argue that there are possible analytic existential propositions. For example 'science fiction characters do not exist'. Because of these weaknesses on could conclude that Descartes ontological argument fails to prove the existenc eof God. One could also argue that Anselm's 2nd form of the ontological argument is better

  2. DISEMBODIED EXISTENCE CAN NEVER BE EXPLAINED COHERENTLY, BECAUSE IT IS A CONTRADICTION IN TERMS. ...

    When you use the word, 'I'- it is not in reference to the physicality of yourself, but you are referring to your mentality. It is subjective, and personal. The 'I' does not refer to the body but to the mind inside the body, and therefore if people can talk about

  1. Outline the ontological argument and explain how it proves the existence of God and ...

    Anselm differentiates between the existence of God and the existence of anything else. All physical existence is contingent; it relies on something else for its existence. Whereas Anselm argued that God is not reliant on anything for his existence as he has no start or end and can exist independently without any cause.

  2. Outline the ontological argument as presented by Anselm and Descartes.

    existence, God however, is always there and is out of our understanding of time, therefore continues to exist forever. In this light, Gaunilo's objection does not successfully refute Anselm's argument. Immanuel Kant opposed Descartes' version of the argument. He argued that no bridge could be built from the world of ideas to the world of reality.

  1. The Ontological Argument will never be of any use trying to prove God

    However Anselm's reply to this is that it only applies to God as only God has perfections. It can be argued that things subject to space and time cannot be perfect; hence Gaunilo's Perfect Island cannot exist. Aquinas, another key scholar, also rejects Anselm's argument as he claims that many people have different definition and understandings of what God is.

  2. Outline the Ontological Argument for the existence of God.

    Kant?s main criticism against the Ontological argument is that he, unlike Anselm and Descartes, does not see existence as a real predicate, ?? Being is obviously not a real predicate??. He explains that existing is no perfection, like Descartes has previously stated, because it cannot be listed in a description

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work