Spook
September 28th, 2012, 10:56 AM
I'd made this exact post in another thread: (but wanted to make a thread focusing specifically on this topic, not religion in general)
Originally posted by Inky
http://www.princeton.edu/~grosen/puc...tological.html
I found this to be a very good explanation of Anselm's Ontological Argument.
Though there are some very interesting points to ponder over, in logic; there is still no solid edvidence that god exists.
It basically is saying that God exists in our understanding. But, if for some God exists in both understanding and reality, and God is a being from which no higher being can be conceived; then for the people in which God exists in both understanding & reality; the being is greater than that of what exists in the athiest's understanding. From this he concludes that because this is true, God exists in reality.
I don't see how one man's belief being in 2 places, reality and understanding; makes his belief stronger than another man's understanding, without reality.
Think of it this way- Santa Claus exists in a child's understanding & reality, but Santa Claus exists in an adult's understanding; but not reality. So- does this mean that Santa Claus must exist in real life? No.
So how is this man's argument validated at all?
So, that was my take on the argument.
What are your opinion/arguments? :yeah:
Originally posted by Inky
http://www.princeton.edu/~grosen/puc...tological.html
I found this to be a very good explanation of Anselm's Ontological Argument.
Though there are some very interesting points to ponder over, in logic; there is still no solid edvidence that god exists.
It basically is saying that God exists in our understanding. But, if for some God exists in both understanding and reality, and God is a being from which no higher being can be conceived; then for the people in which God exists in both understanding & reality; the being is greater than that of what exists in the athiest's understanding. From this he concludes that because this is true, God exists in reality.
I don't see how one man's belief being in 2 places, reality and understanding; makes his belief stronger than another man's understanding, without reality.
Think of it this way- Santa Claus exists in a child's understanding & reality, but Santa Claus exists in an adult's understanding; but not reality. So- does this mean that Santa Claus must exist in real life? No.
So how is this man's argument validated at all?
So, that was my take on the argument.
What are your opinion/arguments? :yeah: