Anselms proof of the existence of GOd

For those of you who are familier with Anselms proof of the existence of God…can you tell me if there are any loopholes in his theory. Because i couldnt find any no matter how hard i tried, to me it seems that he managed to proove the existence of God with nothing more than logic.

  1. With that same proof you can prove the existence of a perfect person. Yet we know there is no such thing.

  2. Existence is not predicate.

  3. You can conceive a universe without a God as you can conceive a land without trees. Making his existence thus only possible and not necessary.

I ran a quick search on google, I found this page that explains at lenght the problems in Anselm’s proof:

brindedcow.umd.edu/236/anselmcritique.html

The ImmanuelAy-layman rebuttal:

A fool asserts that God does not exist.
God does not believe that there are any other Gods beyond itself.
God is a fool.

Ipso facto: Anselm basically contradicted himself without protection of the contradiction. However, we must remember that being able to refute an argument does not mean that we prove that the latter is not true, nor can we provide enough evidence that supports any other contrary claim to any degree that would make the contrary claim any more truthful than the original claim. Anselm’s proof is like Pascal’s Wager, we can refute it, we can argue against it, but in the end we cannot prove it wrong because of the nature of the argument—God.

My argument is pretty sweet, though.

Thanks alot especially for that link this is really going to help me on my essay tommorow. Thanks again. :slight_smile:

Anyone can prove anything if they believe in it enough.

yeah to start you have to believe in God for the whole thing to work. Just because you can conceive of an object doesn’t make it real. God is a unicorn

GOD = 0 degrees Kelvin; anything “hotter” than that is ITS creation - in a manner of speaking!

Degree Zero on the Body without Organs?

I believe that God is nothingness…

very neo-platonic…

God is the ultimate Stem Cell…in a manner of speaking!

I think Anselms’ proof demands the existence of infinity. We can imagine the concept of infinity, but infinity does not really exist, if it does then it is no longer infinite.
so, the notion that there exists an infinitely perfect being is erroneous.

wow, you been reading AThousand PLateau lately?

Actually I never heard of a “A Thousand Plateaus”. Now I have! Thanks for mentioning it. I already reserved the book!

…as for my little phrases, they are just metaphoric responses to certain kinds of questions…in a manner of speaking :smiley:

one day, this forum shall be called deleuzian.