The Modal Ontological Argument Analysis Video
Anselm \u0026 the Argument for God: Crash Course Philosophy #9 The Modal Ontological Argument Analysis
Deane, 2ndEd. Saintleo, Modules 1- 4 Lecture Notes. Aquinas, Thomas, St. Encountering the Real.
New York: Cengage Custom. Argument: Saint Anselm, Archbishop of Canterburyis the creator of the ontological argument. I think the Ontological Argument of Saint Anselm is unclear because the writing style is confusing and it needs to be more understandable. Speak of the devil! The Modal Ontological Argument Analysis Gaunilo states that Saint Anselm is basically defining things into existence. Monk Gaunilo Argumeng that he believes this practice is unacceptable. Premise three thus explains that a existence is a property; and b to characterize existence makes a thing better, if all things are equal, than it would have been otherwise. Immanuel Kant rejects premise three on the ground that, as a purely formal matter, existence does not function as Thd predicate. Existence is not a property like the way that being red is a property of an apple. Instead existence is a precondition for the exemplification of things in the sense that, The Modal Ontological Argument Analysis is not possible for a non-existent thing to exemplify any properties because there is nothing that such a property can stick itself to.
Introduction
Nothing has no qualities whatsoever. To say thatxexemplifies or instantiates a propertyPis hence to presuppose thatxexists. Okay, Immanuel Kant also writes like Saint Anselm, way too deep for the poor little old average readers like me! In just my lowly opinion, I think a person who writes in riddles is not out to teach as much as they are out to prove The Modal Ontological Argument Analysis smart they are. God does not need our help to show his existence, we need His help to see that He exists.
Navigation menu
This to me is like a child trying to prove they have parents, the process is self-evident. I am, so they are!
Conclusion: Per Anselm — A being thatnecessarilyexists in reality is greater than a being that does notnecessarilyexist. Thus, by definition, if God exists as an idea in the mind but does not necessarily Analgsis in reality, then we can imagine something that is greater than God. But we cannot imagine something that is greater than God. Thus, if God exists in the mind as an idea, then God necessarily exists in reality. God exists in the mind as an idea. Therefore, God necessarily exists in reality.]
Actually. Prompt, where I can find more information on this question?