Gaunilo’s Island
Gaunilo’s famous objection to Anselm’s Ontological argument is known as ‘Gaunilo’s Island,’ it follows as such from his On Behalf of the Fool:
For example: it is said that somewhere in the ocean is an island, which, because of the difficulty, or rather the impossibility, of discovering what does not exist, is called the lost island. And they say that this island has an inestimable wealth of all manner of riches and delicacies in greater abundance than is told of the Islands of the Blest; and that having no owner or inhabitant, it is more excellent than all other countries, which are inhabited by mankind, in the abundance with which it is stored.
Now if some one should tell me that there is such an island, I should easily understand his words, in which there is no difficulty. But suppose that he went on to say, as if by … (Read more)
And you thought Anselm was absurd?
I must admit, I’m a fan of Anselm’s Ontological argument for the existence of God. Well, to be more exact, I’m a fan of Plantinga’s modification of Anselm’s proof. I’m reminded of my fondness for this proof as earlier today I was skimming through The God Delusion to find something to write on and Dawkins wrote something which peaked my interest.
Before quoting Dawkins I think it best to outline Anselms original argument. As approximated by Plantinga, Anselm’s argument goes as follows:
- God exists in the understanding but not in reality.
- Existence in reality is greater than existence in the understanding alone. (premise)
- God’s existence in reality is conceivable. (premise)
- If God did exist in reality, then He would be greater than He is. [from (1) and (2)]
- It is conceivable that there is a being greater than G0d is. [(3) and (4)]
- It is conceivable that there be a being greater
Recent Comments