Essay --

In the mind of Anselm he had noticed that there take to be something that follows from all of this if a world is perfect by definition, and so that existence must exist. Anselm believed that if a perfect creation did not exist, therefore it would not be perfect. In which it would be impossible for idol not to exist, for if He did not exist, there would be no definition of a perfect be. God is a necessary being. The example of you and I as perfect beings is not conceiv adapted because we argon not necessary beings, in our past if there were any change, then we would not exist. God is as yet different, He had to exist. This accurate concept is cognise as the Ontological Argument. though the Ontological Argument is very precise in being able to prove that there needs to be an existent perfect being to be able to have a perfect being. There are several flaws within this argument. For all of Anselms arguments to work, we would need a apprehension of content of his proposition that God is the highest humanity conception. We would also need a correlation between the conception of being in a prevalent way of matching up to the idea of a Supreme Being. The puzzle that Anselm has is that there is not a being that matches up to the type of being that God is. If God were in existence, he would have to be in separable parts and divided into many places if he were to consist of being omnipresent. So He cannot be a perfect one being unless he was multiple beings of reality. What Anselm also didnt cover was the fact of God being a Personal God. When Anselm came up with the line of reasoning known as the Ontological Argument. His argument provides no place or a need for the perfect being to be personal. Which is a big caboodle being a christian, believing in Inc... ...understanding. Which would mean that this person was great than God. But nothing can be greater than God. Hence it is not true that God exists in the understanding but not in reality. In conclus ion, the formulation of the argument from a metaphysical assumption and two philosophical and theological argument takes its false standpoint that builds up an entire edifice on assumptions that werent questioned back in Anselms day. Anselm then could not question whether being was continuous or discontinuous across cultures which philosophers develop much later. The argument is thus flawed insofar as it relies on a definition of the Supreme Being that is conditioned by human reason, while also assuming giving positive, univocal identification to created being and Supreme Being. Resting his theory in general on a overlord exemplarism, which has not yet been proven.