Abstract In this article, the writer compares and contrasts the ontologies of Anselm, Descartes and Kant. The writer maintains that Anselm's ontology is superior to the other two. The writer discusses that Anselm's ontology shows that all three arguments are indeed the same. But Descartes and Kant are in the process of criticizing Anselm, and their criticisms are unjust and misplaced. The writer maintains that this leads them to construct convoluted arguments while saying the same thing as Anselm does. The writer concludes that Anselm's is judged to be the superior argument because it is simple and intuitive.
From the Paper "Ontology is a purported proof that God exists. The ontology provided by St. Anselm in the eleventh century set the standard in Western thought, and on which all subsequent ontology attempts to measure itself. Before the renaissance and the Age of Reason it was generally agreed that only a fool would deny the existence of God. Accordingly the ontology of St. Anselm employs the attitude of a fool - meaning some one without any of the higher concepts of philosophy - as the crux of the argument. The argument commences with a definition of God ... "
This paper looks at Anselm's "Monologion" and how, in it, Anselm covers ontology, the nature of God, His relation to created beings, and the doctrine of the Trinity.
Abstract This essay analyzes Anselm's 'Monologion', spelling out his proof of the existence of God and how he elaborates on the perfection of His nature. The writer explains that Anselm's ontology is based on the idea of perfection, that a perfect being must necessarily exist. While elaborating on His nature Anselm comes to conclude that the Expression of God is the source of all created existence. The writer discusses that Anselm goes on to show the reasonableness of the Christian doctrine of the Trinity, even though he does not intend to prove it. The writer concludes that Anselm acknowledges that we cannot apply predicates to God, which the doctrine of the Trinity does. However, he contends that the doctrine helps us to comprehend the nature of God better.
From the Paper "Anselm's Monologion is at first a detailed expansion of his more famous ontology - the proof of the existence of God - as expressed elsewhere. In this proof God is first equated with the most perfect being, and then it is demonstrated that such a being necessarily exists. The Monologion is concerned more with the nature of the most perfect being, and what else can be predicated about it, in relation to itself, and to created beings. The same line of argument is followed, where the oneness and the perfection of the Supreme Being are emphasized, but after a point we notice that the effort is diverted into explaining the Christian doctrine of the Trinity, so that God is said to be three persons in one substance, and yet indivisibly one. It needs to be remembered that Anselm does not attempt to 'prove' the doctrine of the Trinity. Therefore the latter part of the Monologion is really persuasive rather than demonstrative. The aim is to convince us of the reasonableness of the doctrine of the Trinity."
Abstract This paper discusses and compares Martin Heidegger's phenomenological analysis of human existence and St. Anselm's ontological argument on the existence of God. The writer describes the concept of "dasein," or "being," and the special meanings that Heidegger assigned to it. The writer explains how Heidegger saw being as preceding knowing and how his argument progresses to the conclusion that the being of "dasein" is time. St. Anselm, on the other hand, begins with a negative proposition and uses logic to deduce the existence of God. The writer concludes that while St. Anselm derives everything else from the generalization of God's existence from logic, Heidegger finds it nearly impossible to even completely understand the concept of being.
Outline:
Heidegger
St. Anselm Comparison
From the Paper "St. Anselm advanced that since God is that, than which nothing greater can be thought, He must necessarily exist in reality (Kent 2006). His ontological argument was in the form of a deduction ad absurdum. It presents a hypothesis, which presents unacceptable or non-valid consequences, which make the hypothesis false. He argues that God is that "than which no greater can be conceived" and sets it in conflict with the hypothesis that God does not exist. If the hypothesis is accepted or valid, then nothing imaginable can be greater than God. It also argues that a God that exists is greater than a God that does not exist."
Abstract This paper offers a brief synopsis of the 'Proslogion', and Anselm's ontological argument. The writer examines Anselm's first premise of the ontological argument for evidence to prove God's existence via reason, and explains how it is compelling in that it astutely chooses understanding and coherency as foundation to knowing. The second premise follows with a vigilant use of philosophical forms to prove God's existence is reality. The writer concludes that Anselm's work serves as a potent persuasive tool for the theist who is engaged in an ontological dialogue with an atheist or agnostic. This paper contains MLA-style footnotes but does not include a works cited page.
From the Paper "First, Anselm writes about understanding, and how understanding and conceiving leads to existence of that which is conceived. If something is understood by a person then it exists. When the concept of God is conceived and understood, God then exists. For example, if an expression X is understood by a person Y, then X exists in the understanding of Y. Second, Anselm's argument informs us that when something exists in understanding it also exists in reality. As a matter of importance, it would be better for it to exist in reality than in understanding. Lastly, if the Supreme Being only exists in understanding, it would then entertain the thought of something being greater than it. If the Supreme Being exists in understanding, it can be "thought" to exist in reality."
Abstract The following essay critically analyzes Anselm Berrigan's poems: "In the paintings of Will ", "My Poem", "Poem minus thing", "Ghost Town" and "A short history of autumn". This essay suggests that if we look at life's journeys from Berrigan's view and their path along the way, we may have a clearer understanding of where Anselm Berrigan is going with his poetry.
From the Paper "The poems in Anselm Berrigan's "Integrity & Dramatic Life", express many aspects of individuality, isolation, cycles of life, mental anguish and frustration of society. Some of the poems tend to resemble rambling but in a sense relate to aspects of the subject as it is seen in the mind of ones inner thoughts. The "Ghost Town," for example shows ones outlook on the cycle of life and the process of labor. Anselm expresses a view of the cycle of labor in a practical sense but also uses outward ramifications to show some of his imaginary personality. "
Abstract The writer of this paper shows how Anselm (1033-1109), philosopher, theologian and church leader presented an argument for the existence of God that has been debated by philosophers and academicians for centuries. The paper shows that from the beginning, Anselm's argument has been met with criticism, appreciation and interest by philosophers such as Kant, Descartes and Spinoza. The writer is of the opinion that, after studying the argument, although interesting, it has certain basic flaws, which he attempts to bring out in this paper.
From the Paper "While analyzing Anselm's argument and focusing on its weaknesses, the obvious question arises: Why has the argument fascinated so many philosophers over the years, if it was such a weak argument? The answer probably is that it is difficult to prove Anselm's argument wrong logically. Even Kant's argument that ? existence is not a predicate? has been challenged by others who have argued that there are senses in which existence is a predicate. So the controversy of and fascination with Anselm's argument is far from over and is likely to continue."
Tags: Book, on, Behalf, of, the, Fool, Lost, Island, Proslogium, Gaunilo, Liebniz, RAA
Abstract This paper begins with a summary and explanation of St. Anselm's ontological argument for the existence of God. The paper then takes a look at rebuttals to his argument presented by such famous thinkers as Rene Descartes, St. Thomas Aquinas and David Hume.
From the Paper "St. Anselm's ontological argument for the existence of God makes an appeal to pure reasoning, priori, without empirical evidence of any sort. St. Anselm's argument begins with a reference to fool in Psalms 53:1. St. Anselm asserts that even the fool is convinced that something exists in the understanding at least, than which nothing greater can be conceived. He claims that merely by analyzing the concept of God, we can deduce that God exists. St. Anselm's stresses that God is the greatest conceivable being, "a being than which none greater can be conceived." St. Anselm's concept is logical and understandable because it is intelligible, God exists in the understanding. St. Anselm's argument goes onto state that a being that exists merely in the understanding is not as great as a being that exists in reality as well. So a being that exists in the understanding alone is not the greatest conceivable being. "
Abstract This essay looks at the argument for the existence of God, by arguing against Kant's criticism of the Anselmian Ontological Argument in favor of God. It details the Ontological Argument, noting the definitions of the priori, a posteriori, necessary and contingent propositions. It then looks at how Kant built on Aquinas' proofs of the existence of God, and refutation of Anselm's proofs, but then how Kant's criticism fails through his inconclusive argument that God must not exist in order to exist.
From the Paper "A Criticism of the Ontological Argument for God The Ontological Argument was formulated by Saint Anselm (1033 - 1109), the future Archbishop of Canterbury. He made the influential "A Priori" argument in favor of the existence of God. This argument would later be famously rejected by Saint Thomas Aquinas (c. 1224 - 1274), an accomplished theologian and philosopher, who rejected Anselms' argument with a five point "A Posteriori" argument in favor of God. It would be later Immanuel Kant (1724 - 1804) who would launch one of the strongest critiques of Anselm's ontological argument, by arguing that existence is not actually a property of existing things."
Abstract The paper analyses two of Anselm of Canterbury's short works; "Free Will" and "The Fall of the Devil".
The paper discusses free will and free choice in the context of both works, and concludes that, though on first perusal both seem to offer very different and distinct views, in actuality the two are closer than they seem.
From the Paper "In Anselm's "Free Will" and "The Fall of the Devil", there is a distinct impression left, at least initially, that the first of these two readings cleaves to the view that "free choice" is a unilateral conception with God controlling all, while the second of the two readings posits that "free choice" is very much that with man (or at least angel) apparently free to thwart the intended dispensation of salvation by God. However, the following paper will argue that the two chapters are actually closer than they appear because God has permitted subordinates a measure of power and autonomy that necessarily leaves them free to reject his will. "
Abstract This paper discusses one of the influential Christian leaders and thinkers of the medieval era - St. Anselm of Canterbury. It begins by describing his background and his life and then discusses how he helped to shape philosophical thought during his era and develop the intellectual life of England in the twelfth century. The paper provides examples of his contributions.
From the Paper "It is difficult to imagine that one could go to Anselm in doubt about God, be subjected to this often-circular set of self-definitions, and come away in a more clear spiritual state, believing in God and one's relationship with God. To the contrary, it is easier to imagine that a person's reasoning powers would be beaten down by such a philosophy to the point that faith seems a simple respite from thought. We find the same problem when Anselm sets out to discover the relationship among foreknowledge, predestination, and free choice. With respect to foreknowledge and free choice, Anselm writes that it does not seem that God's foreknowledge of what a man is going to do and man's free choices are incompatible. He says that the two can somehow coexist, though, and he sets out to discover if this thesis is correct. Even before he begins his line of inquiry, though, the reader should see that Anselm simply cannot know what God knows or when he knows it. What he is doing is trying to use words to create a place of possibility wherein an individual can imagine that God's foreknowledge and man's free will are not incompatible. The fact is that they very well might be compatible in some divine sense to which human beings can have no access, even through reason."
A comparison of three distinct approaches to the proofs for the existence of God, as set forth, respectively, by Anselm, Thomas Aquinas, and Emanuel Kant.
Abstract This paper analyzes the distinct approaches to the theological question of how to prove God's existence by three theologians: Anselm, Thomas Aquinas and Emanuel Kant. The writer provides the historical, religious and intellectual background of each of the three, and summarizes each theologian's approach and what they had in common, as well as their differences and limitations. The writer also discusses why the three theologians differ and explains how each approach expanded the writer's personal knowledge of the ongoing debate concerning the proofs for God's existence in theology.
From the Paper "Thomas Aquinas lived from 1225 to 1274 C.E. Thomas was related to Italian aristocracy and to kings and emperors of other countries. He joined the Dominicans, who for their missionary purposes stressed the importance of the gospel and academic knowledge. Problems arose in the 13th century with the dealing of the rediscovery of Aristotle's thoughts, thanks to the work of Spanish Muslims such as Averroes. Some theologians completely rejected Aristotelian thought while others accepted it uncritically. Unlike these other theologians, Aquinas welcomed Aristotelian thought but with a critical outlook. The rediscovery of Aristotle's writings was the beginning of how some theologians acquired the ability to initiate a meaningful dialogue between science and philosophy with theology - yet ironically, its acceptance was embraced after Aquinas' life."
Abstract This paper examines St. Anselm of Canterbury's and Thomas Aquinas' attempts to prove the existence of God. The paper examines the arguments of both theologians and explains that, while their methods of proving the existence of God are very different, their arguments have endured and influenced Christian thought through the centuries. The paper also looks at the weaknesses in both men's theories and concludes with the assertion that the major weakness of both theories is that they prove the existence of God but not the existence of the God of the Bible and that in order to believe in the Christian God, divine revelation is needed.
Table of Contents
Introduction
Anselm's Arguments
Argument from Goodness
Argument from Existence
Ontological Argument
Aquinas' Arguments
Argument from Motion
Argument from Efficient Cause
St. Aquinas on St. Anselm Problems with Anselm Problems with Aquinas
Conclusion
From the Paper "Anselm (1033 - 1109), would be considered in today's terms a theologian/philosopher. Anselm is most famous for his writings on; "Why God Became Man", his "satisfaction" theory of the atonement, and the "ontological argument." (His satisfaction theory effectively refuted early medieval notions of the devil's "rights" over fallen humankind. The satisfaction theory shaped nearly all Catholic and Protestant thought on redemptive theology, and is still prevalent at the date of this paper. (Evangelical dictionary of theology)). Anselm attempted to prove the existence of God via a much-debated theory known as the "ontological argument", which will be considered in further detail below."
Abstract This paper examines how Anselm proposed a series of Christological doctrines in his most famous work, "Cur Deus Homo" or, "Why The God-Man." The principle theory is known as the Satisfaction Theory and it was the predominant contention of the Church for almost a millennium. This paper explores the theory, as well as the history and circumstances that led to Anselm's development of what later became Church doctrine.
From the Paper "Before Anselm's Satisfaction Theory, the commonly accepted theory of many Church Fathers was the Ransom Theory. This was a presumption that held the contention of God's conquest over enslavement, and it was the predominant church belief for a millennium.2 This theory was adapted from the passage in Mark 10:45, in which Christ is said to have, "Give[n] his life as a ransom for many." The theory contended that Christ's humanity was taken by Satan, but so too was his veiled divinity, and it was Christ's divinity that Satan allegedly took without having the appropriate authority. In taking what he was not allowed to take, Satan forfeited all of his rights over humanity, and humanity was thus saved from the power of evil."
Tags: christianity, church, doctrine, hamartia, sin, theology
Abstract By discussing the beliefs, works and philosophies of Saint Anselm and Descartes, this report attempts to prove that God exists. Descartes has been credited with one of the most interesting but also one of the least understood arguments in regard to the existence of God. Fascination with his argument comes from the fact that his effort to prove God's existence was a very simple premise. The paper shows that Saint Anselm's goal was to prove the existence of God with logical and philosophical understanding which, in modern times, has often been interpreted as an attempt to replace the 'faith' side of the argument.
From the Paper "Saint Anselm defined God by first saying that there could be nothing greater than God. Saint Anselm used the argument that all things in existence existed through one thing and that every existing thing exists either through something or through nothing. Since nothing can exist through nothing, everything must exists through something. That something was God. "Thus Christian philosophy for Anselm does not mean a dialectical process which begins with everyday, external and common-sense things, whose reality is accepted at their face value by all mankind, and then proceeds to demonstrate certain less evident, or perhaps even entirely unknown, truths..."
Abstract This paper discusses the the age old argument of who or what is God, what qualities does God have and can God even be defined. The writer of this paper explains and defines in detail the ontological arguments as given by Saint Anselm and Rene Descartes.
Topics covered in this paper include:
Introduction
Anselm's Version
Descartes' Version
Conclusion
Bibliography
From the Paper "Another counterargument to Anselm's ontological argument is that it assumes that God in reality must be something that is greater than what can be conceived. In this case, however, "God," first of all, could not be conceived of, thereby making the argument useless. Also, even if God could be conceived of, what would be greater than what could be conceived of would be unintelligible. Being unintelligible, it could be that no theory that man could ever formulate might be able to be applied to "God."
