Guanilo and Kant

The moment we are born we begin to die. As unpleasant of a statement as that may be, it is indeed a morbid reality. The topic of death usually invokes a number of questions from us as human beings. Questions such as, “Is there a God?” and if there is, “Will I see him when I die?” While to some it may seem natural to simply question the existence of God, who is looked upon as the omnipotent creator of the universe, others have made it a life’s work to argue and dispute the existence of God all together. While the existence of God is certainly a debatable issue in today’s society, it is not a new debate to say the least. Many have long tried to both prove, and disprove the existence of God. One such man was St. Anselm of Canterbury (1033-1109). In the eleventh century, Anselm came up with one of the most famous arguments for the existence of God; this argument was known as the “ontological Argument.” Anselm’s ontological argument states, in modified text, that God possesses every perfection, existence is perfection, and therefore God must exist. While this is indeed a valid, deductive argument, there have been those who have rejected

Guanilo was not the only one to fiercely argue against the ontological argument. Immanuel Kant’s criticism of the ontological argument is perhaps the most famous objection to the argument ever made. While it may seem reasonable to assume that Kant’s objection is sound, it is also fair to state that it may be irrelevant to the argument itself. Kant’s objection, in modified words is, “Existence is not a property. If existence were a property of X, say then if you took it away, you would be left with X- minus existence. X- minus is nothing in the way of existence. There are no none existent things. ” Kant does raise some interesting points in his argument but fails to clearly state where his objection lies. If his objection to the argument lies with existence not being a property, one could simply argue that God also allow for his perfection. Simply claiming that existence is not a property is not enough to discredit Anselm’s argument. Kant also objects that there are no none-existent things. While this point can be fairly noted and argued for quite strongly, it appears to be irrelevant when arguing against the ontological argument. Anselm’s argument makes no assumptions that God is non-existent leaving one to wonder why Kant would even include the issue of non-existence in his objection. While Kant does make interesting points in his objection, I believe he does little more

Some topics in this essay:
Immanuel Kant’s, Guanilo Kant, God Anselm, Kant Guanilo, ONTOLOGICAL ARGUMENT, Behalf Fool, Argument” Anselm’s, ontological argument, Anselm Canterbury, existence god, intrinsic maximums, existence property, anselm’s argument, discrediting ontological argument, discredit ontological argument, objection argument, discrediting ontological, perfect island, x- minus existence, guanilo’s objection, argument guanilo, ontological argument guanilo, anselm’s ontological argument,