It’s a fascinating argument, but I’ve always found its elegance more compelling than its conclusion. Anselm’s logic is airtight 𝘪𝘧 you accept his definitions...but that’s a big “if.” The leap from concept to reality still feels like a sleight of hand, especially after Kant. Still, it’s a brilliant example of how far reason can stretch when trying to grasp the infinite.
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.
It’s a fascinating argument, but I’ve always found its elegance more compelling than its conclusion. Anselm’s logic is airtight 𝘪𝘧 you accept his definitions...but that’s a big “if.” The leap from concept to reality still feels like a sleight of hand, especially after Kant. Still, it’s a brilliant example of how far reason can stretch when trying to grasp the infinite.
Thanks for explaining this Anselm’s “logic.” What a crock of merde.