Prove that God can be imagined not to exist
Not a member of HubPages, create an account.
Rebuttal to St. Anselm's Philosophy
To begin, I will say that ST. ANSELM’s presentation seems ridiculous to me. As a believer in some sort of higher power, I see where he is coming from that GOD is the greatest being one could imagine, but when we talk about imagination there is no limit to the extensive power that can be granted to any figure with-in our mind. I mean no disrespect to GOD what so ever, but with-in my mind, I can imagine GOD as the greatest, most powerful being ever to exist, then I can continue to imagine that any object I choose is even more powerful. I could imagine that the mouse that controls the pointer on my screen is the most powerful being in all existence. I do of course see that this is not true, and that a being or entity capable of creating everything that I can touch and see is far more powerful than my mouse. But in the mind of someone that has no belief in a higher power the mouse may as well be the ultimate power as opposed to GOD. Just as “The Lost Island” might be the greatest island in the world, and it may or may not exist, I can easily imagine one more extensive than anyone could ever describe to me. Furthermore, imagining it or being told about it doesn’t make it a reality. It is difficult for me to imagine our world with no creator, but if I leave behind all of my experiences and only use evidence that can be studied and scientifically evaluated it becomes quite easy to imagine, and even believe. It is the experiences that I can not explain or examine scientifically that cause me to believe in GOD, not what I can imagine, or what I’ve been told, or what I’ve read. Believe me I have read maybe too much on the subject. History and religion have been a passion of mine for over 25 years, and I have extensively researched both and looked for correlations between the two. Honestly, if it were up to facts and writings and philosophy to convince me, I would be an atheist. Every book I have read on the subject, which is in the hundreds I’m sure, has contained contradictions or impossibilities. For example, the Holy Bible (KJV) has three errors; at least, on the first page of Genesis. Back to the subject at hand, I believe that St. Anselm’s attempt at Ontological proof of God’s existence fails miserably. If one believes that GOD exists just because he can be imagined, than I want to meet that person, in hopes that they too can imagine giving me all of their valuables, which in comparison must be true as well. Equally, to say that GOD exists most truly because he can not be imagined not to exist is just a pun and really makes no since at all. GOD can be imagined not to exist; I am imagining it right now. I do know of his existence as a possibility, and I do understand many of the explanations of his existence, and what he is explained to be, yet can still imagine that this world came to be with-out his existence. I could even go as far as to say that I could imagine a world where the idea of GOD didn’t even exist, and no one in the entire world had ever heard of or thought of GOD or any god-like entity. After I ponder that for a moment, I do see a bit of strength in the argument, in that; the idea of GOD had to of come from somewhere, so if not from GOD then from where. Of course, there is the easy answer that he was invented by man, just as so many characters in thousands of fictional stories have been invented, which still leaves ideas to ponder.
The Lost Island
Back to “The Lost Island” where an interesting point lies. I do understand that somewhere there is an Island that is more plentiful than all others. It is not imaginary, it is real, it may not be the legendary “Lost Island”, but one of the islands on this earth is superior to all others, at least for a specific purpose. Deciding which island that is for sure may be impossible, due to the fact that it is only ideal for a specific purpose, not all purposes. What one person considers superior will definitely differ from person to person, or purpose to purpose, and when you begin looking at it from culture to culture it will most likely vary even more extensively. The point I’m trying to make is that the diversity that exists between one religion; to the next is mostly defined by the barrier between cultures, and the perceptions and traditions of the individual involved. I know that this is completely off subject, but the opportunity presented itself, and I never pass up an opportunity to elaborate on religious perspective.