Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
→‎Ontological argument: Spelling, grammar, and general cleanup, typos fixed: Anselm’s → Anselm's
Line 83: Line 83:  
{{cquote|"The argument is ingenious. It has the appearance of a linguistic trick, but it is a difficult task to say precisely what, if anything, is wrong with it. All forms of the argument make some association between three concepts: the concepts of God, of perfection, and of existence. Very roughly, they state that perfection is a part of the concept of God, and that perfection entails existence, and so that the concept of God entails God's existence." <ref>http://www.philosophyofreligion.info/ontological.html</ref>}}
 
{{cquote|"The argument is ingenious. It has the appearance of a linguistic trick, but it is a difficult task to say precisely what, if anything, is wrong with it. All forms of the argument make some association between three concepts: the concepts of God, of perfection, and of existence. Very roughly, they state that perfection is a part of the concept of God, and that perfection entails existence, and so that the concept of God entails God's existence." <ref>http://www.philosophyofreligion.info/ontological.html</ref>}}
   −
The ontological argument was first formulated by [[Anselm]] of Canterbury (1033-1109), one of the great medieval philosopher-theologians, in his ''Proslogium'', Chapter 2. Anselm’s ontological argument rests on the identification of God as “that than which no greater can be conceived”. Once it is understood that God is that of which no greater can be conceived, Anselm suggests, it becomes evident that God must exist.
+
The ontological argument was first formulated by [[Anselm]] of Canterbury (1033-1109), one of the great medieval philosopher-theologians, in his ''Proslogium'', Chapter 2. Anselm's ontological argument rests on the identification of God as “that than which no greater can be conceived”. Once it is understood that God is that of which no greater can be conceived, Anselm suggests, it becomes evident that God must exist.
    
A problem with this argument is that it merely defines God into existence. It is unclear if the concept of being able to conceive of a perfect being has any connection to actual existence.  Without being able to make this connection, the merit of the argument can become questionable.
 
A problem with this argument is that it merely defines God into existence. It is unclear if the concept of being able to conceive of a perfect being has any connection to actual existence.  Without being able to make this connection, the merit of the argument can become questionable.
Block, SkipCaptcha, apieditor, Automoderated users, Bots, edit, ratelimit-exempt
59,470

edits

Navigation menu