خلاصة:
The present article pursues two main objectives: first, to provide a precise and meticulous analysis of Anselm's ontological argument, and second, to identify the logical fallacy in this argument. To achieve the first goal and to correctly understand the ontological argument, both formulations of this argument in the second and third chapters of Anselm's Proslogion are examined; for further clarification, the objections of Gaunilo, Anselm's contemporary monk, and Anselm's responses to him are presented. In the second part of the article, while referring to Thomas Aquinas's criticisms of Anselm's ontological argument and evaluating them, an attempt is made to express the existing flaws in this argument and the reason for its invalidity by relying on the theoretical foundations of Mulla Sadra.
ملخص الجهاز:
Anselm sought to prove His existence through the mere analysis of the concept of God. Despite its simplicity, the ontological argument contains many obscure and complex philosophical issues, which has caused it to always attract two groups: proponents and opponents.
Of course, although the above definition may seem a bit confusing at first, it actually expresses our intuitive understanding of the concept of God. From what has been said, two key points emerge that in fact constitute two premises of Anselm's ontological argument: 1) All humans, even atheists, have a mental concept of God, because denying the existence of God requires an intra-mental understanding of Him. How can one deny God without having a concept of Him in the mind?
The second objection to Anselm is actually a counter-argument; he believes that even if we set aside the first objection and assume that the concept of God as "that which is inconceivable" fits within our understanding, with this description, there is no evidence available to prove that this concept necessitates the extra-mental reality of God. Gaunilo presents his counter-argument by mentioning the example of an island explains;[3] one can imagine an island in the ocean that possesses all kinds of wealth and abundance, an extremely magnificent island that is "greater than which cannot be conceived.
In this way, Anselm attempts in both formulations to prove His external and objective existence by using the mental concept of God. The fundamental objection to Anselm's argument is that he, through the confusion of the judgments of the mind and reality, has extended the judgment of the concept to its instance.
(
, 
, 
)
