Rowe reasons that it does not attempt to prove anything about the first cause or about God, except to argue that such a cause must exist.
Two such arguments are the Ontological and Cosmological arguments. Both the Ontological and Cosmological arguments have their strengths and weaknesses. However, they have been criticized by Immanuel Kant because he disagrees with both arguments.
Anselm, Rene Descartes, St. Thomas Aquinas and Immanuel Kant all believe in the existence of God, but their theory on his existence differs. Anselm's point of view is one basis for the Ontological argument.
Anselm believes in God but wants to give a rational explanation of God's existence. He said "God is that, than which nothing greater can be conceived.
Even a fool who doesn't believe in God can understand that. It is greater to exist than to not exist. Since we have a working notion of God it would be a contradiction to say God does not exist.
Infinite being necessarily exists. It has to exist due to its nature. However, contingent being requires specific evidence or experience. In the single case of God, its notion is enough to guarantee his existence. He says in "Proslogium" "God is whatever it is better to be than not to be; and he, as the only self-existent being, creates all things from nothing.
Anselm 79 Rene Descartes' theory is another basis for the Ontological argument. His theory states that God is a necessary deduction from the data of pure reason. He moves by a means of clear and distinct ideas.
Concept of God contains real existence. He says in "Meditations V" "And not only do I know these things with distinctness when I consider them in general, but, likewise [however little I apply my attention to the matter], I discover an infinitude of particulars respecting numbers, figures, movements, and other such things, whose truth is so manifest, and so well accords with my nature, that when I begin to discover them, it seems to me that I learn nothing new, that is to say, that I for the first time perceive things which were already present to my mind, although I had not as yet applied my mind to them.
The weakness of the Ontological argument however is that it's conclusion is not clearly identifiable from its main statements. The main statements of the Ontological argument are: God is a being than which nothing greater can be conceived. The conclusion of those statements, according to St.
Anselm and Rene Descartes is that God exists.
That conclusion is not logically observable based on the statements. Immanuel Kant criticized the Ontological argument.My paper will present the Cosmological Argument for God"s existence, and show that its underlying principle, the Principle of Sufficient Reason, fails to establish it as a sound argument for the existence of God.
The Cosmological argument on the other side, is a a posteriori established argument. They claim that the reality of an proposition may only be known to be true after empirical knowledge is utilised to establish the declaration true or incorrect.
The cosmological argument can be used by many to justify and proof the existence of God however it can backfire as for example with Aquinas’ second way of causes. It is said everything has a cause it can be argued then ‘shouldn’t God have a cause’.
Aquinas cosmological argument for the existence of God is known to be the most popular by philosopher and religious scholars.
In his theological masterpiece, Summa Theologia, he proposed varies forms of cosmological arguments to explain “ways” that he thought would prove God exists. The cosmological argument for the existence of god essays on the great. The cosmological argument for the existence of god essays on the great.
5 stars based on 66 reviews timberdesignmag.com Essay. Essays on personality traits, verb. Like all cosmological arguments, the kalam cosmological argument is an argument from the existence of the world or universe to the existence of God. The existence of the universe, such arguments claim, stands in need of explanation.