Religious belief is a strong faith in the existence of a supernatural being who is in control of ones’ destiny. To believe that God exists one needs to have faith. Different people hold onto different reasons as to why they believe in God, some of which include; the need for personal control-majority of the people understand and believes that power or authority comes from above thus from God and you have to seek Him first. Secondly, coping with death-it increase people’s belief in the powerfulness of the prayer and spirits. They believe there is life after death and thus receiving consolation. Having firm faith enables people to wait upon the lord and what they cannot see and to have hope that good things will happen after undergoing struggle (Feinberg, Joel & Landau 25). This paper is a summary of the ontological argument that there is existence of God and possible objections based on my perspective on whether it is right or wrong.
The ontological arguments -these are types of cases that use priori logical reasoning, fundamental premises and analytics to conclude that indeed God is existent. These arguments are source derived rather than world observation thus they arise from thinking alone. The first well known argument was put forward by St. Anselm of Canterbury in the 11th. Century C.E. from his Proslogian writings, St. Anselm assumes God’s existence to be more significant than what one thinks of. He also reasoned out that if the very being does not exist, then there is a conception of an existing in reality which is extraordinary (Feinberg, Joel & Landau 31). The second argument argues that God is in time, eternal unlimited and some of the existence hence a real being. He also explains that if God is existent, then he must be an essential being rather than unforeseen being. A creature that cannot be imagined to exist must seem to be bigger than that which is envisioned to be non-existent. This kind of argument is referred to as ‘Reductio ad absurdum’. Anselm in cooperates this method with the aim of reducing the inconsistency of a phenomenon being proved (God is non-existent). He purposes to show the obvious that by use of an argument that God’s existence is logically essential but he can’t exist (Feinberg, Joel & Landau 32).
René Descartes came up with many ontological arguments based on Anselm’s original works. Descartes argues and believes at the same time that God is supremely a perfect being. God holds all the perfections, and it is a must he exists. He also tries to put forward that God is naturally perfect and the geometric idea or the triangular shape is a good illustration of who he is, and his existence cannot be denied at all cost. Analytically the statement is true. The clauses in statement say something that is true in almost all instances. Descartes vigorously defended that analytically beinghood belonged to the highest God just as three angles to the triangle.
With failure to prove that God exists the ontological arguments by Anselm faces criticisms posed by various philosophers. One them is Gaunilo. He used an island theory. He urges people to conceive and believe that an island is real and does exist rather than imagining. Anselm counteracts the Guaiol’s approach with a reasonable explanation that the only applicable arguments were of a required existence. The island theory will never reach perfection and can only be enhanced since it undetermined object (Feinberg, Joel & Landau 37). Descartes adds that there will be no full conception of God by the people humans example theists. Thomas Aquinas also suggests that without a good understanding of God and his essence no one will fully ever conceive him.
Kant’s major criticism is that the existence is not real as per the theories put forward by both Anselm and Descartes. He states that sentiments “God exists” can only be analytical because of the meaning the word is granted. David Hume adds criticism to the argument saying that human beings do not have a significant understanding and experience concerning the existence of God and no conclusion on God’s presence can be made via conceiving (Feinberg, Joel & Landau 41).
In my own thinking capacity, the ontological argument does not prove God’s existence. Atheists reviewing the same argument will encounter difficulty understanding hoe Anselm and Descartes prove God’s existence. Its only based on assumptions and no atheists will come to term with this argument. The ontological argument being a priori, it offers no concrete support or evidence. Relying only on logic makes it harder to comprehend how the whole thing can be correct because of they no nothing about God, not even though assumptions. Many people propose that conception of God is impossible and so is his existence hence; ontological argument does not adequately provide information that anyone, not anyone not even an atheist to honestly believe in God’s presence.
The ontological argument for God’s existence is both criticised and supported at the same time. The theory had its strength and weakness. In our humanity, no one can prove God’s existence we only believe that he lives and reigns forever. This situation leaves us helpless to demonstrate to our atheist’s brothers. But all in all, every individual has his or her own beliefs about religion and God that propels them to act or do things in a certain way as far as your faith is concerned. Most people believe in God’s significant is in such a way that people receive blessings, inherent problem solving, removal of fear and anxiety, accepting of the holy spirit and provision of guidance in their daily undertakings by God.
Feinberg, Joel, and Russ Shafer-Landau. Reason and Responsibility: Readings in Some Basic Problems of Philosophy. , 2017. Print.