FREE ESSAY ON ANSELM'S ONTOLOGICAL ARGUMENT

ANSELM'S ONTOLOGICAL ARGUMENT

Anselm's Ontological Argument
Saint Anselm's ontological argument seeks to provide an a priori proof (proposition which
can be known or justified independent of experience) of God's existence. However,
Gaunilo, a contemporary of Anselm and a fellow Catholic, argued that Anselm's ontological
argument is invalid, because an argument of the same form could have true premises and a
false conclusion therefore, he introduced perfect island argument which is perfectly
parallel to ontological argument. In this paper, I will discuss St. Anselm's ontological
argument and how Gaunilo used his perfect island argument as an objection to Anselm. In
addition to this, I will briefly discuss Anselm's replies to Gaunilo's criticisms. 
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Anselm's definition of God is .... You are something that nothing greater can be
conceived. (Anselm 127) Anselm's statement essentially means that it is not possible to
think of being greater than God. Anselm also states that God is the greatest thinkable
being, he is referring to the fact that it would be impossible to imagine or to create in
ones mind someone or something being better than God. Therefore, it would be impossible
to say that God only exists in ones mind because it is much greater to exist in reality
than it is to exist only in ones mind. Later, Anselm suggested that God has many
attributes which describe him. Among these being: self-existent, a necessary being,
omnipotent, omniscient, completely just, and timelessly eternal however, the most
important attributes is the fact that he is self-existent. In essence, that means that
God depends on nothing else for his existence, he is uncaused. Therefore, his existence
is timelessly eternal. This means that God cannot stop existing. On the other hand,
contingent beings (such as ourselves) depend on something else for their existence. One
example of this is 
1
that as a child we utterly depended on our parents for food, clothing, and shelter.
Contingent beings therefore can begin to be or cease to be at anytime. They can, unlike
God, be here today and gone tomorrow. Anselm uses the definition of God, which I have
described above, to prove God's existence. Now, let's look at the premises;
1. God is the GCB (Greatest conceivable being)
2. God exists or doesn't exist
3. Assume God doesn't exist
4. If God does not exist then the GCB does not exist
5. You can conceive of existence GCB
6. But an exiting GCB is greater than a non-existing GCB
7. But nothing can be greater than the GCB
Anselm believes that God is the greatest being we can possibly think of. He does this by
first trying to prove the opposite of what he really wants to prove. For example, in
premise three lets suppose God does not exist in reality. Now, we could think of
something greater, a being that has all the same virtuous characteristics as we think God
has, but also being able to exist in reality. He then tries to prove that this
supposition leads to a conclusion, which cannot possibly be true. Then the original God
would not be the greatest thinkable being, this new something else, that actually exists
would be. This new God who actually exists would then be able to be seen, heard and
touched by the individuals who believe he exists as the greatest thinkable being.
Nevertheless, it is obviously impossible that the greatest being we can think of should
not be the greatest being we could think. Therefore, the conclusion that God does not
exist must be false. Anselm then believes that the opposite of this supposition must be
true therefore, God exists. A 
2
perfect God must exist in reality. Otherwise, God would not be totally perfect. Existence
is perfection.  For it is one thing for a thing to stand in relation to our
understanding; it is another thing for us to understand that it really exists. (Anselm
127) A modern day example of Anselm's theory is that if I can really imagine a perfect
guy for me. This guy would actually exist somewhere in the world. A guy with all of the
best qualities that I can possibly think of or can imagine in other words, he would be
everything that I am looking for. According to Anselm's beliefs, he would most defiantly
exist. Anselm uses God's definition to argue that ...it is impossible to think of it as
not existing. (Anselm 27)
Now, let's look at the Gaunilo's argument, which is perfect parallel to Anselm's
argument. Gaunilo's perfect island argument is basically about an island (somewhere in
the ocean) which is said to be, ...more abundantly filled with inestimable riches and
delights than the Isles of the Blessed, and that although it has no owner or inhabitant,
it excels all the lands that men inhabit taken together in the unceasing abundance of
it's fertility. (Gaunilo 128) This description of the island give clear picture in one's
mind and person can easily imagine how this island would look but, if someone say that
this island exists without a doubt,
...some should wish by this argument to demonstrate to me that this 
island truly exists and is no longer to be doubted, I would think he 
were joking; or, if I accepted the argument, I do not know whom I
would regard as the greater fool, me for accepting it or him for
supposing that he had proved the existence of this island with any 
kind of certainty. (Gaunilo 129) 
3
Now, just to have better understanding what is going on let's look at the both arguments'
premises;
Anselm's argument Gaunilo's perfect island objection
1. God is GCB 1. P-island is GCI 
2. God exists or does not exist 2. P-island exist or does not exist
3. Assume God doesn't exist 3. Assume island doesn't exist
4. You can conceive of an existing GCB 4. -----------------------------------
Gaunilo's Perfect Island argument look perfectly parallel to Anselm's however, if you
look closely premise four, there is the problem. You can conceive of an existing GCB
however, it is impossible to conceive of an existing GCI since there is no infinite size
than the conclusion is false. Also, Premise one, Perfect Island is finite and GCI is
infinite this leads to false conclusion as well since these two can't be at the same
time.
Anselm replies to Gaunilo's criticism that his argument applies to God, GCB not to 
p-island, GCI. Sober mentioned on page 86 that Gaunilo is informing that there is mistake
in Anselm's argument however, he does not point out that where mistake really occurs and
same in Anselm's reply he fail to point out the mistake in Gaunilo's p-island argument.
Than later Gaunilo replies to Anselm, 
It should be proved by some most certain argument that some superior
reality, that is, a nature which is greater and better than everything that 
is, a nature which is greater and better than everything that is, actually 
exits. From this we can then prove all the other qualities which must 
not be lacking from that which is greater and better than all things. (Gaunilo 129)
4
Anselm replies to that ...same thing cannot be both conceived and not conceived at the
same time. Than moving on with his reply Anselm added, what he is conceiving must
necessarily exist, because whatever is able not to exist is not that of which he is
conceiving.
In conclusion, Ontological argument by Anselm's and Gaunilo's perfect island objection is
perfect parallel however, Gaunilo's argument fail to prove eventhough, all of the
premises are true but since there is no infinite size so, the conclusion is wrong.
However, on the other hand side Anselm's conclusion is true that God is GCB, but it does
not prove that God exists. Lastly, whether Anselm's definition of God gives actual proof
of God's existence or not, I believe that the only way to believe that God actually
exists is to have true faith in him.