AS Anselm's Ontological Argument

Explain Anselm's Ontological Argument. (25)

Anselm put forward the ontological argument in his prayer ‘Proslogion’ in order to explain how God’s existence must be true by definition, or a priori. He uses deductive logic, which means that his conclusion is logically necessary if you also accept the a priori evidence he provides. Anselm’s argument is an example of ‘faith seeking understanding’, as he believed that true understanding of God can only be a result of pre-existing faith and belief – his personal motto was ‘credo ut intelligam’, meaning ‘I believe so that I may understand’. Therefore Anselm’s argument is heavily influenced by his ideas of God, and uses these to understand God’s existence, unlike other arguments which aim to use a posteriori evidence and use inductive logic to explain how these point towards God’s existence.

In the first half of Anselm’s argument, he explains how the definition of God means that his existence is necessary through deductive logic. He states that we conceive of a God as ‘a being than which none greater can be conceived’. Anselm then shows that this is the universal view of God, regardless of whether the person is religious or an atheist. This is because Anselm believes this to be a priori, meaning it is an objective truth and therefore true by definition, so the concept of God is true even in the mind of ‘the fool’, Anselm’s term for atheists. This definition therefore implies that God is the greatest being, as we cannot imagine anything greater. Anselm is, in a way, describing God’s perfection in a similar way to how we describe infinity. It is difficult to pinpoint an exact definition, but is never-ending and is always greater than we can conceive. In order for God to be this perfect, he must not lack any qualities, as this means that something with the qualities he is lacking could be greater than him, which is impossible. Therefore, if we are to accept the definition of God being the greatest being, then it is logically necessary for us to also accept that he must have the quality of existence, as without this, he would not be perfect.

This is how Anselm explains God’s existence, however this could simply explain how God exists in the mind as a concept, not necessarily that he exists in reality. Anselm then goes on to address this issue by saying that something which exists in reality must be greater than something that exists solely in the mind. For example, if we were to imagine the perfect island, the perfect island that exists in reality must be greater than the concept of the perfect island we are thinking of. Therefore, Anselm applies this logic to the topic of God’s existence. He says that if we accept that God is the most perfect being and therefore must exist, he must exist in reality as well as in the mind, as this is the only way for him to truly be perfect. Existing as a concept in the mind is not quite perfect, as it still lacks the quality of existing in reality, meaning anything else that does exist could be better than God, which is impossible.

In the second part of his ontological argument, Anselm looks at how it is impossible for God not to exist, and looking how this then proves that God’s existence is necessary. The fool, or atheist, would state that God exists in the understanding alone, as it is clear that everyone has a concept of God, just as we have a concept of all other imaginary creatures like fairies and mermaids, however this does not mean God exists in reality. However, Anselm states that this argument is a contradiction and therefore a fallacy and cannot be true. This is because if God does exist as a concept, then the concept we have of him must be ‘a being than which none greater can be conceived’, meaning that he is still the most perfect being. If this definition is accepted, then it is logically necessary for God to exist in reality as well as just the mind, as things which exist in reality are more perfect than things which exist simply as concepts. Therefore, by proving the fool’s statement illogical using Reducto ad Absurdum, he is further supporting his own viewpoint that it is in fact necessary for God to exist in reality.

Linking back to Anselm’s point of ‘faith seeking understanding’, he believes that atheists’ lack of belief in God is simply due to a lack of understanding about what God is. If atheists are made aware of the definition and nature of God, for example that he is the most perfect being, then they will have no choice but to also accept the necessary conclusion that he also exists in reality. 

Mark: 25/25, comment: "Excellent - concise yet detailed. Full use of philosophical concepts. I like your patient style of writing."