Essay --

In the discernment of Anselm he had noticed that at that place involve to be something that follows from tout ensemble of this if a world is perfect by definition, then that being must exist. Anselm believed that if a perfect being did not exist, then it would not be perfect. In which it would be impossible for paragon not to exist, for if He did not exist, there would be no definition of a perfect being. God is a necessary being. The example of you and I as perfect beings is not presumable because we are not necessary beings, in our past if there were any(prenominal) change, then we would not exist. God is however different, He had to exist. This entire archetype is known as the Ontological Argument. Though the Ontological Argument is really precise in being able to prove that there needs to be an existent perfect being to be able to construct a perfect being. There are several flaws within this bank line. For all of Anselms leans to work, we would need a notion of cont ent of his proposition that God is the highest human world. We would as well as need a correlation between the conception of being in a general way of matching up to the idea of a exacting Being. The problem 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 up into many places if he were to consist of being omnipresent. So He cannisternot be a perfect one being unless he was multiple beings of reality. What Anselm also didnt cover was the fact of God being a individualised God. When Anselm came up with the line of reasoning known as the Ontological Argument. His line of descent provides no place or a need for the perfect being to be personal. Which is a big deal being a christian, accept in Inc... ...understanding. Which would mean that this person was greater than God. But nothing can be greater than God. Hence it is not true that God exists in the unde rstanding but not in reality. In conclusion, the formulation of the argument from a metaphysical assumption and both 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 unremitting or discontinuous across cultures which philosophers developed much later. The argument is and then flawed insofar as it relies on a definition of the Supreme Being that is conditioned by human reason, while also assume giving positive, univocal identification to created being and Supreme Being. Resting his theory in general on a divine exemplarism, which has not yet been proven.