Anselm's Ontological Argument

Anselm's "logical" argument for the existence of God.
In a nutshell - it baffles me. Hopefully someone can explain how it could possibly be logical.

UPDATE (14-Jun-08):
A4AgnstcFndmntlst supplied this link
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Ct8Vt4NtaQ
I can follow the logic in this video. It seems to confirm my suspicion about philosophical debates being little more than wordplay.

Category:

People & Blogs

Tags:

• anselm's
• ontological
• argument

[Appletree34]

Hah, the unicornism argument. Nothing to see here but Dawkins level philosophy

[1GodOnlyOne]

The text in your video is NOT St Anselm's argument -- it is your own made-up strawman. You wrote those words; St. Anselm wrote something quite different, but your intellectual dishonesty prevents you from approaching the actual argument, sadly.

I didn't finish watching the video, but I will assume that you managed to destroy your own strawman, because doing so is very easy.

Ever consider making a video that includes the actual argument? That would be more difficult, don't you think?

; )

[IGhostlyPk]

WTF IS EVERYBODY TALKING ABOUT I JUST WANT TO UNDERSTAND THE FUCKING ONTOLOGICAL ARGUMENT

[JimmyCrlc]

@Appletree34 Fair enough.  Yet, wouldn't you agree that one only needs "Dawkins level philosophy" to repudiate Anselm's assertion? Hell, a precocious toddler would call bullshit if he heard the ontological argument.

[SHIBBYiPANDA]

It's not a good argument. The use word "greatest" is fallacious.. There's no such thing as objective greatness, so there are objective standards of greatness, so there's no reason to think that a being that exists is "greater" than a being that doesn't exist..

[thatgaybloke]

@1GodOnlyOne "Exodus 21:20-21: 20 Anyone who beats their male or female slave with a rod must be punished if the slave dies as a direct result, 21 but they are not to be punished if the slave recovers after a day or two, since the slave is their property."

[1GodOnlyOne]

I just realized that I have been discussing objectivity with an individual who claims that he doesn't know what the word objective means. Yikes!

Continuing such a conversation would be basically the same as discussing it with a pig, who also doesn't know. Therefore I am done with you.

Feel free to further demonstrate your extreme stupidity by continuing to post by yourself after I leave. LOL

In any case, I won't be reading your ignorant crap anymore -- have a nice life!

[thatgaybloke]

@1GodOnlyOne I think you have missed the point entirely. You are making the fantastic claims. It is for you to back up those claims. Not for me to disprove them. If the latter, then we come back to unicorns and similar ridiculous notions.

[1GodOnlyOne]

@thatgaybloke What do you mean by "explained?"

Then why did you ask me to point you to a dictionary?

[thatgaybloke]

@1GodOnlyOne Just because you keep saying you've provided irrefutable evidence for premise 1 doesn't make it so. You have done no such thing. You have simply said that only your god can transcend culture and provide an objective view. But even that makes no sense since by being the view held by an intelligent mind it is, by definition, subjective to that intelligence.

[1GodOnlyOne]

@thatgaybloke You have failed to provide evidence for your personal belief that there could somehow be any instructions in the Bible on how to treat slaves, so you lose.

(Lazily posting chapter and verse numbers is not valid proof).