With reference to Anselm’s ontological argument for the existence of God, evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of his argument as well as his response to Gaunilo.
Sample solution
Dante Alighieri played a critical role in the literature world through his poem Divine Comedy that was written in the 14th century. The poem contains Inferno, Purgatorio, and Paradiso. The Inferno is a description of the nine circles of torment that are found on the earth. It depicts the realms of the people that have gone against the spiritual values and who, instead, have chosen bestial appetite, violence, or fraud and malice. The nine circles of hell are limbo, lust, gluttony, greed and wrath. Others are heresy, violence, fraud, and treachery. The purpose of this paper is to examine the Dante’s Inferno in the perspective of its portrayal of God’s image and the justification of hell.
In this epic poem, God is portrayed as a super being guilty of multiple weaknesses including being egotistic, unjust, and hypocritical. Dante, in this poem, depicts God as being more human than divine by challenging God’s omnipotence. Additionally, the manner in which Dante describes Hell is in full contradiction to the morals of God as written in the Bible. When god arranges Hell to flatter Himself, He commits egotism, a sin that is common among human beings (Cheney, 2016). The weakness is depicted in Limbo and on the Gate of Hell where, for instance, God sends those who do not worship Him to Hell. This implies that failure to worship Him is a sin.
God is also depicted as lacking justice in His actions thus removing the godly image. The injustice is portrayed by the manner in which the sodomites and opportunists are treated. The opportunists are subjected to banner chasing in their lives after death followed by being stung by insects and maggots. They are known to having done neither good nor bad during their lifetimes and, therefore, justice could have demanded that they be granted a neutral punishment having lived a neutral life. The sodomites are also punished unfairly by God when Brunetto Lattini is condemned to hell despite being a good leader (Babor, T. F., McGovern, T., & Robaina, K. (2017). While he commited sodomy, God chooses to ignore all the other good deeds that Brunetto did.
Finally, God is also portrayed as being hypocritical in His actions, a sin that further diminishes His godliness and makes Him more human. A case in point is when God condemns the sin of egotism and goes ahead to commit it repeatedly. Proverbs 29:23 states that “arrogance will bring your downfall, but if you are humble, you will be respected.” When Slattery condemns Dante’s human state as being weak, doubtful, and limited, he is proving God’s hypocrisy because He is also human (Verdicchio, 2015). The actions of God in Hell as portrayed by Dante are inconsistent with the Biblical literature. Both Dante and God are prone to making mistakes, something common among human beings thus making God more human.
To wrap it up, Dante portrays God is more human since He commits the same sins that humans commit: egotism, hypocrisy, and injustice. Hell is justified as being a destination for victims of the mistakes committed by God. The Hell is presented as being a totally different place as compared to what is written about it in the Bible. As a result, reading through the text gives an image of God who is prone to the very mistakes common to humans thus ripping Him off His lofty status of divine and, instead, making Him a mere human. Whether or not Dante did it intentionally is subject to debate but one thing is clear in the poem: the misconstrued notion of God is revealed to future generations.
References
Babor, T. F., McGovern, T., & Robaina, K. (2017). Dante’s inferno: Seven deadly sins in scientific publishing and how to avoid them. Addiction Science: A Guide for the Perplexed, 267.
Cheney, L. D. G. (2016). Illustrations for Dante’s Inferno: A Comparative Study of Sandro Botticelli, Giovanni Stradano, and Federico Zuccaro. Cultural and Religious Studies, 4(8), 487.
Verdicchio, M. (2015). Irony and Desire in Dante’s” Inferno” 27. Italica, 285-297.
Sample Answer
Sample Answer
Anselm’s Ontological Argument for the Existence of God
The ontological argument is one of the most famous and controversial arguments for the existence of God. Developed by St. Anselm, an 11th-century philosopher and theologian, this argument posits that the very concept of God implies His existence. While Anselm’s ontological argument has been both praised and criticized, it remains a significant contribution to the philosophy of religion. In this essay, I will evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of his argument, as well as his response to Gaunilo’s objection.
Strengths of Anselm’s Argument
Rigorously logical: Anselm’s ontological argument is logically structured, making it compelling to those who appreciate deductive reasoning. The argument proceeds from the definition of God as “that than which nothing greater can be conceived” and then deduces that this being must exist. This logical structure gives the argument a certain forcefulness.
Emphasizes the nature of God: Anselm’s argument centers on the nature of God, asserting that His existence is necessary because He is a being of maximal perfection. By focusing on the concept of God’s greatness, Anselm attempts to establish that such a being must exist in reality.
Distinct from empirical evidence: Unlike many other arguments for God’s existence, Anselm’s ontological argument does not rely on empirical evidence or observations about the natural world. Instead, it seeks to establish God’s existence through pure reason and reflection on the concept of a perfect being. This makes it appealing to those who find empirical arguments unconvincing.
Weaknesses of Anselm’s Argument
Relies on subjective definitions: Anselm’s argument hinges on defining God as “that than which nothing greater can be conceived.” However, this definition is subjective and may vary depending on individual interpretations. Critics argue that different people may have different conceptions of greatness, making the argument less compelling.
Does not prove existence in reality: Anselm’s ontological argument, although logically structured, does not provide concrete evidence for God’s existence in reality. It only establishes that if God exists in concept, He must also exist in reality. Skeptics argue that existence in thought does not necessarily imply existence in reality.
Can be inverted: An objection to Anselm’s argument is that it can be inverted to prove the non-existence of God. If one defines God as “that than which nothing worse can be conceived,” then it could be argued that a perfect being does not exist since there are always possible improvements. This objection challenges the universality of Anselm’s definition.
Anselm’s Response to Gaunilo
Gaunilo, a contemporary of Anselm, objected to his argument by presenting a parody called “The Lost Island.” Gaunilo argued that if Anselm’s reasoning was valid, it could be applied to prove the existence of any perfect thing, even imaginary ones such as a perfect island.
In response, Anselm distinguishes between necessary existence and contingent existence. He contends that God’s existence is necessary because His perfection cannot be conceived otherwise. On the other hand, an island’s existence is contingent and dependent on other factors.
Anselm argues that God’s necessary existence is unique and cannot be compared to contingent entities like islands. He asserts that the concept of a perfect island is flawed because an island can always be improved upon, whereas God’s perfection is absolute and cannot be surpassed.
In conclusion, while Anselm’s ontological argument has strengths such as its logical structure and emphasis on the nature of God, it also faces weaknesses concerning subjective definitions and lack of concrete evidence. Nonetheless, Anselm’s response to Gaunilo’s objection highlights the distinction between necessary and contingent existence, reinforcing the uniqueness of God’s necessary existence. Whether one finds Anselm’s argument persuasive or not ultimately depends on their philosophical and theological inclinations.
