St. Anselm's Argument Analysis

1352 Words 6 Pages
St. anselms guides his study of philosophy by the principle faith seeking undesrtanding. He is best know is best known for the argument he puts forward in the proslogion, the ontological argument of than which nothing greater can be thought. He uses this to explain to the fool that there is in fact a god and this conclusion can be logically arrived upon. He begins the monologion in a similar way arguing for something that is supreme in its good qualities. by looking at anselms argument we can see that the merit of his argument in the monologion and how it works with the argument of the proslogion. Anselm begins the Monologion with asserting the existence of god, and that one can logically conclude this.This passage reflects Anselm’s conception …show more content…
Anselm begins by calling attention to the disparity of dignity as distributed among beings, saying that, “If someone considers that nature of things, he cannot help realizing that they are not all of equal dignity”(160). He gives examples such as our own superiority to horses, and in turn their superiority to wood(160). Anselm provides only the abstract concept of dignity to explain the disparity among these beings, however he takes these differences to be self-evident. He goes on to say that, “Since it is undeniable that some natures are better than others, reason makes it no less obvious that one of them is so preeminent that he has no superior”(160). Here, Anselm sets out God as a being “that is so superior to any other thing or things that there is nothing to which he is inferior”(160). Having established God’s goodness and existence, Anselm continues by making evident his superiority over all other beings. Anselm entertains the possibility of several such beings, however he responds to this in a way to reassert the supremacy of one being. He says that such beings “cannot be equal through different things, but rather through the same thing” Thus this quality would have to be the embodiment of the highest being “For whatever is great through anthers less than that through which it is great”.This argument is significant to Anselm’s purpose to rationalize a Christian God, as it is …show more content…
Both attempt to deduce the existence of God by reason alone, and both without any assumption of divine revelation or sensory experience. While the monologion offers compelling proofs for God’s existence, it also suffers from shortcomings, namely an inherent a priori assumption that God exists. What the monologging does offer are a description of divine qualities. While it may prove that God is the most good, the source of existence, ar even a being superior to all others, none of these prove God’s existence. Rather, should the assumption be made that God exists, this is essential description of Him. These series of argument have no overarching theme to draw them together for an ultimate proof of God. The proslogion on the other hand, offers a concise proof for Gods existence, as a being than which “NGT” However, the apparent simplicity of this arguments opens it up to criticism. For example, as guano applies this proof to a supreme island, as it is not made very specific how the argument applies to God. The proofs offered in the monologion, make it more clear that such a proof is only applied to a supreme being. As a such of supreme goodnes, first existnece, and supreme existence. Thus the arguments of both the proslogion and the monologion are best taken together. As th eproslogion offers an overarching principle as to the existence of god as ngt, and the monologion offers,

Related Documents