Born at Aosta in Burgundy,
Anselm (1033-1109) was a pious child and sought admission to the monastic life
at the early age of 15. The local Abbot, however, refused him of his father’s
insistence (Abbot mean ‘a man who is the head of an abbey of monks’). After his
mother’s death, Anselm went for travelling. Eventually he arrived at the Abbey
of Bec and began studying under the renowned Prior Lanfranc. He eventually took
his monastic orders in 1060. Only three years later, when Lanfranc was
appointed Abbot of Caen, the young Anselm succeeded him as Prior much to the
chagrin of older and more established candidates. During the next 30 years he
wrote his philosophical and theological works and was appointed Abbot of Bec.
Now remembered as the
father of the Scholastic tradition and Archbishop of Canterbury from 1093 until
his death, Anselm is of philosophical
interest mainly for his logical arguments in two major works, the Monologion (meaning ‘Soliloquy’) and the
Proslogion (Discourse) both of which
gave various arguments intended to prove the existence of God. By the 12th
century the works of Plato and Aristotle had been rediscovered and
reinterpreted by the scholastics who attempted to synthesise early Greek ideas
with medieval theology. Following the Greek tradition, it is said that Anselm’s
students had been concerned to hear a rational justification for the existence
of God that did not rely merely in the acceptance of Scripture or doctrinal
teaching. Anselm’s most famous response to this challenge was to become
famously known as “the ontological argument for the existence of God” which has
been called by some one of the most hotly debated issues in the history of
philosophy.
Consider, invites Anselm,
that by the term ‘God’ we mean something than which nothing greater can be
thought of. Given that even the non-believer or, as Anselm calls him, the Fool,
accepts that this is what the concept of God entails, the existence of God
would seem to follow necessarily from the definition. For it would be a
contradiction to suppose that God is on the one hand something than which
nothing greater can be thought of and on the other hand does not exist. For a
God thought of that does not really exist is not so great as one thought of
that does exist, and since one can clearly think of God and suppose he exists,
then something which nothing greater can be thought of must be something that
exists (read the last two passages again).
Anselm’s ontological argument is ingenious in its
simplicity. While most people agree
that there is something rather fishy about it, opinion has been divided as to
exactly what is the matter with the argument. The earliest critic of Anselm was
a contemporary Benedictine monk called Gaunilo of Marmoutiers. Gaunilo argued
that if Anselm’s reasoning were correct, then one could conceive of a lost
island that was the most perfect island there could ever be. Since by
definition the island is the most perfect it must exist, for by Anselm’s
reasoning it would be less than perfect if it did not. Thus, complained
Gaunilo, Anselm’s reasoning licences the existence of all sorts of imaginary
objects and must therefore be faulty. In response, Anselm claimed that the
quality of perfection is an attribute that only applies to God, and therefore
his ontological argument cannot be used to prove the existence of imaginary
islands or anything else.
Versions of Anselm’s
ontological argument were later used by both St. Thomas Aquinas and Rene
Descartes and were, much later still, heavily criticised by Immanuel Kant. Kant’s
principle complaint was that the concept of God as a perfect being does not
entail that God exists since ‘existence’ is not a perfection. The concept of a perfect
being that exists is no more or less great than the concept of a perfect being
that does not exist. Philosophers agree that the problem with Anselm’s argument
revolves around the fact that we surely cannot ascertain whether something
exists or not merely by analysing the meaning of a word or concept. However,
exactly what logical error is being committed by attempting to do so has
remained a cause of much dispute amongst philosophers and logicians.
The argument was taken up
again in more recent times, in the 1960’s, when the philosopher Norman Malcolm
revived a lesser known variant of Anselm’s argument which sidesteps the
objections made by Kant and others. According to Malcolm, Anselm argues in the Proslogion that if it is possible that a
necessary being could exist, then it must exist, for it would be a contradiction
to say a necessary being does not exist. God could only fail to exist of the
concept of God was self-contradictory or nonsensical. This remains to be shown
by opponents of the ontological argument.
[Summarized from Philosophy 100 Essential Thinkers by
Philip Stokes, 2012. Also watch YouTube’s ‘Anselm
and the Argument for God’ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FmTsS5xFA6k]
Lord, Give
Us Today Our Daily Idea(s)
No comments:
Post a Comment