ASSIGNED to Daisy Arabella
Read the 2 PowerPoints!
Which argument for the existence of God is better? You don’t have to think either one is particularly good; I am just asking you to explain which one is better *and* why. This requires you to tell me why the one you didn’t select as superior is worse than the one you did.
Here are some examples:
1.
I believe that Rene Descartes’ argument for the existence of God is better than St. Anselm’s argument. Descartes’ argument seems to help us understand how the idea of perfection is formed in the human mind even when we humans’ are not perfect. So the idea of that perfection must come from someone perfect which is God. St. Anselm is worse that Descartes’ because he is trying to refute those that understand the exists of God, but do not believe in it which is inconsistent. Human beings are creatures that learn and understand others and other people’s ideas. We could learn and understand why others believe in a God, but they do not have to believe in it.
2.
God Existence
Has anyone ever believed in God? In Philosophy field, St. Anselm and Rene Descartes explain their points of view about God existence clearly. However, if looking at two analyses, I find the explanation of St. Anselm is better than the other one for third reasons. First, St. Anselm depict the full of the premises. Through those premises, he makes me understand the reason why God exists. God represents the power that is stronger than anything. Second, St. Anselm concludes what he argues. Since people often cannot define the huge impacts or mystery which happened around in the world, the existence of god answers all that questions. Third, I quite disagree with the view of Rene Descartes for perfection and infinite are only goals and wishes that human always expect to reach. Hence, I thought that perfection and infinite cannot use to reason for the God existence. All in all, the argument of St. Anselm helps me to have an overview and to gain the reason of God existence.
3.
In the argument of the existence of God, I side with St. Anselm’s ontological argument over Rene’ Descartes. St. Anselm’s argument uses logical truth versus Rene Descartes usage of clear and distinct ideas. St. Anselm first premise, which is the most important because all other follow, is his conception of God. St. Anselm argues, then nothing can be imagined that is greater than God. If God does not exist, though, then something can be imagined that is greater than God, namely a God that does exist. The problem with Descartes argument is of his claim that the idea of perfections can only come from perfections. Our ideas are often shaped by our environments and exposure. For example, I think I’m the strongest man physically in the world therefore I am. Then one day I go to the gym and that idea or thought of me being the strongest man in the world is erased by an environment.
