Examine the Key Concepts of the Ontological Argument for the Existence of God
1b) Examine the key concepts of the ontological topic for the substance of God (18) The ontological topic rests on the preface that the universe’s substance is contingent- it depends on bigwig else to consist. The topic is auricular, analytic and a priori, and was foremost formed by St. Anselm, who prayed for a concise topic that would verify God to be “that than which pin elder can be designd”.
This benediction was named the proslogion and prepared to verify God by instrument of reductio ad absurdum, which propounds that the substance of God is logically expedient. The topic is fixed on the engagement “God”, a substance that enjoyes all unexceptionableions, future must consist. Anselm was known that the substance of God is robbed by atheists and in defense to this, he propounds “the imbecile has said in his core there is no God”. Descartes posterior reformulated the ontological topic, who sought to verify the substance of God through discuss over.
He symmetrical that he consists, and in his impetus he has the concept of a unexceptionable substance, and as an imunexceptionable substance, he could not bear conjured up the proposal of a unexceptionable substance, future this proposal must bear originated from the unexceptionable substance itself, and this unexceptionable substance must consist in command to be unexceptionable, future a unexceptionable substance consists. He as-well symmetrical that the proposal of God is the proposal of a unexceptionable substance, and a supremely unexceptionable substance has all unexceptionableions, substance is unexceptionableion, a supremely unexceptionable substance must bear substance, future it is unusable to believe of God as not consisting, future God consists.
Gaunilo symmetrical that if the ontological topic was applied to things other than God, then it led to sick conclusions. He applied Anselm’s preface to the proposal of a unexceptionable island: I can design of an island that no elder island can be purpose of; such an island must enjoy all unexceptionableions; substance is a unexceptionableion; the island consists. He as-well symmetrical that the views of the “greatest island” would be mental. Kant symmetrical that “substance is not a predicate”, which would dishonor twain Anselm and Descartes topics.
He observed that substance is not partner after a while the restriction of bigwig past it does not add to our intelligence of that thing; “it would be self-contradictory to posit a triangle, yet discard its three angles”. Russell furthered Kant’s proposal, and symmetrical that we should opine the claims that a) all cows bear tails and b) all unicorns bear horns. Grammatically, this is redress, besides, it does not propound whether they consist, and future does not arrange open notice. Similarly, Hume symmetrical that the topic makes counterfeit assumptions encircling substance; “we cannot fix bigwig into substance”.