Anselm’s Ontological Argument for God’s Existence
Understanding Anselm’s Ontological Argument: Can We Prove God Exists Just by Thinking?
1. What Is the Ontological Argument?
The ontological argument is a unique and fascinating idea. It tries to prove that God exists just by thinking about the concept of God — without using any evidence from the world.
Most arguments for God (like the design or cosmological arguments) depend on things we observe. But the ontological argument is purely based on logic and ideas.
Think of it like this: Just like the idea of a “bachelor” means “an unmarried man,” the idea of “God” (according to this argument) means “the greatest being that can be imagined.” And from this very idea, the argument tries to prove that such a being must exist.
2. Why Is This So Special?
Normally, we need to look at the world to prove whether something exists. You can't prove unicorns exist just by defining them—you have to go find one.
But there’s one exception: things that are logically impossible. For example, you don’t need to check every corner of the world to know that “square circles” don’t exist—the idea itself is a contradiction.
Anselm’s argument says that denying God’s existence is like saying “square circle”—a contradiction. So, God must exist.
3. Anselm’s Original Argument (Step-by-Step)
St. Anselm (1033–1109) came up with this in his book Proslogion. Here’s the idea in simple steps:
God is the greatest being that can be imagined.
God exists in our minds (as an idea).
A being that exists in reality is greater than one that exists only in the mind.
So, if God only existed in the mind, we could imagine something greater (one that exists in reality).
But we can’t imagine something greater than the greatest possible being.
Therefore, God must exist in reality.
Key Point: Anselm says existence is a “great-making” quality — it makes a being better. So, the greatest being must exist.
4. Objections to Anselm’s Argument
a. Gaunilo’s Perfect Island
Gaunilo, a monk, disagreed. He said you could use Anselm’s logic to prove anything—like a perfect island:
Imagine the greatest island possible.
It exists in the mind.
An island that exists in reality is better.
So, it must exist!
The Problem: The idea of a “greatest island” doesn’t really make sense. You can always imagine a better island—more fruit, more beaches, etc.
But Anselm’s idea of God involves perfections like all-knowing, all-powerful, and morally perfect — these things do have logical limits (you can't be “more than all-knowing”).
b. Aquinas’s Criticism
St. Thomas Aquinas agreed that God exists, but he didn’t like this argument.
He said not everyone defines God the same way. So this argument only works for people who agree with Anselm’s definition.
He also said we don’t truly understand what “the greatest possible being” means. We can say the words, but our minds can’t fully grasp such an idea.
Still, even if we don’t fully understand it, as long as the idea is not self-contradictory, the argument might work.
c. Kant’s Criticism: Is Existence a Property?
Immanuel Kant (1724–1804) attacked the idea that existence makes something better.
He said “existence” isn’t a real quality like “kindness” or “strength.” It’s not something you add to a concept.
Saying “God exists” doesn’t add anything to the idea of God. It just says that such a being is real.
So, if existence isn’t a real quality or “perfection,” then Anselm’s argument falls apart.
Example: Saying “a house is better if it exists” sounds odd. A blueprint doesn’t become better just because the house is built.
5. Anselm’s Second Argument (A Stronger Version)
Anselm had another version that avoids some problems.
It goes like this:
God is the greatest being imaginable.
A being that cannot be imagined not to exist is greater than one that can be imagined not to exist.
If God could be imagined not to exist, then God would not be the greatest.
That’s a contradiction.
Therefore, God must exist in such a way that we cannot imagine Him not existing.
This version doesn’t say existence is a property. Instead, it says necessary existence (can’t not exist) is what makes God truly great.
Final Thoughts
The ontological argument is a deep and clever attempt to prove God’s existence through pure reason. Some find it convincing, others don’t.
But it remains one of the most debated and intriguing ideas in the history of philosophy.
What Do You Think?
Do you agree that God’s existence can be proven just by thinking about the idea of God? Why or why not?
Thanks for reading keep supporting human philosophy.
Recommended posts you might read:
God was invented by man's incomprehension to understand that after death there is nothing Is Nothing God?
Very interesting approach. I hope this truly helps those who are trying to find answers to spiritual questions only through logic and mind.