The Perfect God

1
The Perfect God

• Anselms clever trick

2
St. Anselm (1033-1109), Archbishop of Canterbury
3
Faith Seeking Understanding

• If anyone does not know, either because he has
  not heard or because he does not believe, that
  there is one nature, supreme among all existing
  things, who alone is self-sufficient in his
  eternal happiness, who through his omnipotent
  goodness grants and brings it about that all
  other things exist or have any sort of
  well-being, and a great many other things that we
  must believe about God or his creation, I think
  he could at least convince himself of most of
  these things by reason alone, if he is even
  moderately intelligent. (Monologion)

4
Background The argument of the Proslogion

• The fool has said in his heart, there is no God.
  (Psalm 141)
• How can a believer answer the fool?
• Anselm claims that it is part of the nature of
  God to exist.
• His argument is called ontological (reason about
  being) because its premises turn on what we
  understand God to be, and its conclusion is that
  such a being must exist.

5
The Argument I

1. We believe that You are something than which
   nothing greater can be thought.
2. (I)t is one thing for an object to exist in the
   mind, and another thing to understand that an
   object actually exists.
3. Even the fool is forced to agree that
   something-than-which-no-greater- can-be-thought
   exists in the mind.

6
The Argument II

• (S)urely that-than-which-a-greater-cannot-be-thoug
  ht cannot exist in the mind alone.
• For, if it exists solely in the mind, it can be
  thought to exists in reality also, which is
  greater.
• If, then, that-than-which-no-greater-can-be-though
  t exists in the mind alone, this same
  that-than-which-no-greater-can-be-thought is
  that-than-which-a-greater-can-be thought.
• But this is obviously impossible.

7
The Argument III

• (T)his being exists so truly that it cannot be
  even thought not to exist.
• For something can be thought to exists that
  cannot be thought not to exist, and this is
  greater than that which can be thought not to
  exist.
• Hence, if that-than-which-a-greater-cannot-be-thou
  ght can be thought not to exist, then
  that-than-which-a-greater-cannot-be-thought is
  not the same as that-than-which-a-greater-cannot-b
  e-thought, which is absurd.

8
Aftermath

• Why, then, did the Fool say in his heart, there
  is no God?... Why indeed, unless because he was
  stupid and a fool.
• The challenge here if the fool really thought
  there was no God, he did precisely what A has
  argued he cannot do.
• So Anselm has to explain in what sense the Fool
  could believe there is no God, even though we
  cannot really think that this being doesnt
  exist.
• How does he do this?

9
Responses

• How do we go about criticizing arguments?
• Standard Attack one or more premises, or attack
  the link between the premises and conclusion
  (i.e. deny that the conclusion really follows).
• But there are other kinds of response Consider
  Guanilos On behalf of the Fool, which takes
  two different tacks.

10
First question how could Anselms argument
possibly work?

• Guanilo begins with the distinction between what
  is thought of in the mind, and its existing in
  the world it cannot be doubted that this truth
  is one thing, and the understanding which grasps
  it is another.
• He also worries whether we really do have a
  proper idea of this being neither do I know
  the reality itself, nor can I form an idea from
  some other things like it, sinceit is such that
  nothing could be like it, and It is rather (as)
  one whothinks of it in terms of an affection of
  his mind produced by hearing the spoken words

11
Consequences

• Its not clear to G that this thing is in the
  mind what he accepts is only a verbal grasp of
  it I do not concedethat it exists in a
  different way from thatwhen the mind tries to
  imagine a completely unknown thing on the basis
  of spoken words alone.
• So G rejects a premise of Anselms

12
The Island

• The story a wonderful island, better than all
  other islands
• Its easy to understand these words.
• But if the story-teller goes on to say, and you
  must believe this island exists, since it is the
  most excellent island, and it wouldnt be all
  that excellent if it didnt exist, we would not
  be convinced.
• So G claims A needs first to prove the existence
  of this wonderful being, before trying to make a
  necessary link between the idea of the thing and
  its existence.

13
Closing Shots

• G. reassures us about his orthodoxy.
• But at the same time, G. emphasizes that I can be
  certain of things (such as my own existence)
  while recognizing that they could be otherwise,
  and asks, if I can think of myself as not
  existing while being certain that I do exist, why
  couldnt I also think of God as not existing
  despite my certainty that he exists?