I once read in a book that there has been an accident where the agnostic Bertrand Russell, while walking and smoking in the Trinity Lane of Cambridge, suddenly shouted, “It is valid! It is sound!” He is pertaining here on the Ontological Argument of Saint Anselm.* And indeed Anselm’s Greatest Conceivable Being inducted countless believers and faced a legion of Fools, to use Anselm’s language game.
So it follows that how could we call it “greatest” if in fact it does not exist in reality. If that is so then there will be something greater, but what is greater than the greatest? The “greaterest”? Thus, Saint Anselm believe that the atheist is a fool in stating God is not for he knows in his mind that God is. The very fact that the idea of God is in my mind means that there must be a God in the here and now of reality for the otherwise will contradict God’s very nature of being the Greatest Conceivable Being. As for me, I think his thesis stands erect because of the validity of his assumptions. Yet other thinkers such as Gaunilon will raise their eyebrows. How can the good old monk argue that what is in the mind must automatically be in reality? Gaunilon utilized Anselm’s argument by stating the “Greatest Conceivable Island” arguing that even though I have in my mind the “GCI” still an island in reality can still be better than what is in my mind. Here Gaunilon is deserving of the title of being the Fool. Yes he believes in God but he misses the point. Anselm’s argument lies on the assumption that God is the beyond, the meta-physical and so any other comparison to physical objects using the same method falls short of the strength the argument has. In a sense, Anselm’s Reductio ad Absurdum in favor of the GCB only applies with God. Another case is the master thinker Immanuel Kant. Kant reacted that Anselm’s argument falls short of proving what God is, Anselm merely stated that God is. And indeed he did. Anselm’s argument for the GCB gave the final blow in providing the rational basis of God’s existence. Just like Descartes’ Infinite, the GCB cannot not exist in reality for the very fact that it is already in the mind. Let me first digress and talk about Descartes. He says that the idea of the Infinite, that is, God, cannot be conceived by us, finite beings, therefore the Infinite itself is the one who put it there. But back to reality, Kant’s voice still rings like a voice in the wilderness. But what is God? What are the adjectives for Him? We can say, Almir is good looking, Rico is kind hearted, and the like but what should we say of God? Kant hit the stone here. Indeed, Anselm’s argument only proves that God exists, he does not provide the predicate in the sentence. And I believe it is rightly so for it is the original intention of the good old monk’s heart. Kant here deserves to be called wise not the Fool as other scholars would say. Kant did not deny God’s existence as Anselm proved it but he still seeks the predicates. Some theorists would suggest that this means that Kant denies God’s perfection and the like. But what are those but products of our limited language? Indeed, Kant’s rant gives us the light that God is but not just what we think Him to be. God eludes our categorization, our Totalization, as Emmanuel Levinas beautifully calls it. Kant’s argument does not deny all the good qualities we attribute to God, it only makes us see that there is more to it. But like Anselm, Kant merely stopped by questioning. I think the story will be complete when the Wise stops and accept that his language falls short and it is only God who can define Himself. And this, in turn, will truly prove God’s glory (although that still falls short). Would the Fool accept this? I believe so but only if he has an open mind to see Anselm’s point as Russell did. Would I be the Wise by accepting Anselm’s arguments? Non sequitur. It does not follow. Merely accepting is still “merely”, that is, it has a lesser degree than proving it yourself. Thus the true Wise is the one who has an open mind and a curious heart that without prejudice, always in the state of epoche of the Phenomenologists, seeks the Divine. Am I then the Wise or the Fool? I think I am the “or”, I’m there right at the middle. * This passage appeared in his autobiography. However, Russell later contradicted himself when he said that Anselm's Ontological argument is not plausible. Thanks to Prof. Ben Carlo Atim for pointing this out to me when this article first appeared. This is originally a paper passed as an assignment to Philo of Religion Class under Mr Rodolfo V. Bagay Jr at Saint Paul Seminary (2015)
At long last, here it is! After almost a year of planning and revising, Saint Paul Seminary and Sapientia Etudiants Recherche proudly presents to you the maiden issue of Aletheia: A Journal of Philosophy, Communication and Culture. Crossing the threshold of these three distinct yet interrelated studies, Altheia whose name derives from the Greek word for "Truth" or "Unconcealment" tries to see the meeting point - i.e. Aletheia - The search for the Truth. And indeed, nothing is of the Truth if not anchored on the One who said that He is the "Way, the Truth and the Life". Edited by Sem. Jerome Precia Ypulong, current Chairman of Sapientia with the guidance of yours truly and the Saint Paul Fathers and Saint Paul Seminary Faculty, Aletheia now enters the field of thw written world of Truth-seeking Wisdom-loving adventurers. The maiden issue includes academic articles by Fr. Norman Melchor Pena Jr, SSP (Saint Paul Seminary), Br. Romualdo Abulad, SVD (UST), Amable "Ka Abe" Tuibeo (PUP-Manila), Fr. Ross Heruela, SVD (Divine Word School of Theology), Ian Gabriel Ceblano (SPS), Jhon Fred Caranzo (SPS), Jerome Ypulong (SPS) and academic essays by Fr. Luis David, SJ (ADMU) and Cl. Buen Andrew Cruz, SSP (SPS/DWST). And so I invite you to subscribe now or if you want you may pass your papers too. Just follow the Turabian format of Research or other similar formats (8,000-12,000 words only) saved as MS Word file and send it to [email protected] or fill up the contact form below. |
anonymous lenzJust a traveling someone in this reality we have fallen in love with... this we call our world... "What is essential is invisible to the eyes..." Tags
All
"The absolutely other is the Other" Archives
September 2018
"There is only one corner in the universe that you can be certain of improving and that's your own Self" |