Essay Section 2: (Answer ALL parts of this essay) Worth 35 p…
Essay Section 2: (Answer ALL parts of this essay) Worth 35 points. 1. In your own words fully explain Anselm’s Ontological argument for God’s existence step by step. How exactly is it that he thinks he can prove that an ACTUAL God exists from just the mere IDEA of God? Explain the logical thought process of this argument step by step and in detail. (You may bring Descartes’ Ontological Argument into this if you want). Make sure you illustrate your points with your own examples. As part of your explanation, make sure to explain why the Ontological Argument can be used with the idea of God, but NOT with something like the “perfect ice-cream cone”. 2. How does this sort of argument differ from an a posteriori approach like the Cosmological or Teleological arguments? 3. Explain in your own words and in detail BOTH of Kant’s criticisms to the Ontological Argument that “Existence is not a predicate”. Make sure you fully explain exactly how these criticisms affect the Ontological argument. Give your own examples.
Essay Section 2: (Answer ALL parts of this essay) Worth 35 p…
Questions
Essаy Sectiоn 2: (Answer ALL pаrts оf this essаy) Wоrth 35 points. 1. In your own words fully explain Anselm's Ontological argument for God’s existence step by step. How exactly is it that he thinks he can prove that an ACTUAL God exists from just the mere IDEA of God? Explain the logical thought process of this argument step by step and in detail. (You may bring Descartes' Ontological Argument into this if you want). Make sure you illustrate your points with your own examples. As part of your explanation, make sure to explain why the Ontological Argument can be used with the idea of God, but NOT with something like the “perfect ice-cream cone”. 2. How does this sort of argument differ from an a posteriori approach like the Cosmological or Teleological arguments? 3. Explain in your own words and in detail BOTH of Kant’s criticisms to the Ontological Argument that "Existence is not a predicate". Make sure you fully explain exactly how these criticisms affect the Ontological argument. Give your own examples.
Essаy Sectiоn 2: (Answer ALL pаrts оf this essаy) Wоrth 35 points. 1. In your own words fully explain Anselm's Ontological argument for God’s existence step by step. How exactly is it that he thinks he can prove that an ACTUAL God exists from just the mere IDEA of God? Explain the logical thought process of this argument step by step and in detail. (You may bring Descartes' Ontological Argument into this if you want). Make sure you illustrate your points with your own examples. As part of your explanation, make sure to explain why the Ontological Argument can be used with the idea of God, but NOT with something like the “perfect ice-cream cone”. 2. How does this sort of argument differ from an a posteriori approach like the Cosmological or Teleological arguments? 3. Explain in your own words and in detail BOTH of Kant’s criticisms to the Ontological Argument that "Existence is not a predicate". Make sure you fully explain exactly how these criticisms affect the Ontological argument. Give your own examples.
Essаy Sectiоn 2: (Answer ALL pаrts оf this essаy) Wоrth 35 points. 1. In your own words fully explain Anselm's Ontological argument for God’s existence step by step. How exactly is it that he thinks he can prove that an ACTUAL God exists from just the mere IDEA of God? Explain the logical thought process of this argument step by step and in detail. (You may bring Descartes' Ontological Argument into this if you want). Make sure you illustrate your points with your own examples. As part of your explanation, make sure to explain why the Ontological Argument can be used with the idea of God, but NOT with something like the “perfect ice-cream cone”. 2. How does this sort of argument differ from an a posteriori approach like the Cosmological or Teleological arguments? 3. Explain in your own words and in detail BOTH of Kant’s criticisms to the Ontological Argument that "Existence is not a predicate". Make sure you fully explain exactly how these criticisms affect the Ontological argument. Give your own examples.
Essаy Sectiоn 2: (Answer ALL pаrts оf this essаy) Wоrth 35 points. 1. In your own words fully explain Anselm's Ontological argument for God’s existence step by step. How exactly is it that he thinks he can prove that an ACTUAL God exists from just the mere IDEA of God? Explain the logical thought process of this argument step by step and in detail. (You may bring Descartes' Ontological Argument into this if you want). Make sure you illustrate your points with your own examples. As part of your explanation, make sure to explain why the Ontological Argument can be used with the idea of God, but NOT with something like the “perfect ice-cream cone”. 2. How does this sort of argument differ from an a posteriori approach like the Cosmological or Teleological arguments? 3. Explain in your own words and in detail BOTH of Kant’s criticisms to the Ontological Argument that "Existence is not a predicate". Make sure you fully explain exactly how these criticisms affect the Ontological argument. Give your own examples.
Essаy Sectiоn 2: (Answer ALL pаrts оf this essаy) Wоrth 35 points. 1. In your own words fully explain Anselm's Ontological argument for God’s existence step by step. How exactly is it that he thinks he can prove that an ACTUAL God exists from just the mere IDEA of God? Explain the logical thought process of this argument step by step and in detail. (You may bring Descartes' Ontological Argument into this if you want). Make sure you illustrate your points with your own examples. As part of your explanation, make sure to explain why the Ontological Argument can be used with the idea of God, but NOT with something like the “perfect ice-cream cone”. 2. How does this sort of argument differ from an a posteriori approach like the Cosmological or Teleological arguments? 3. Explain in your own words and in detail BOTH of Kant’s criticisms to the Ontological Argument that "Existence is not a predicate". Make sure you fully explain exactly how these criticisms affect the Ontological argument. Give your own examples.
Essаy Sectiоn 2: (Answer ALL pаrts оf this essаy) Wоrth 35 points. 1. In your own words fully explain Anselm's Ontological argument for God’s existence step by step. How exactly is it that he thinks he can prove that an ACTUAL God exists from just the mere IDEA of God? Explain the logical thought process of this argument step by step and in detail. (You may bring Descartes' Ontological Argument into this if you want). Make sure you illustrate your points with your own examples. As part of your explanation, make sure to explain why the Ontological Argument can be used with the idea of God, but NOT with something like the “perfect ice-cream cone”. 2. How does this sort of argument differ from an a posteriori approach like the Cosmological or Teleological arguments? 3. Explain in your own words and in detail BOTH of Kant’s criticisms to the Ontological Argument that "Existence is not a predicate". Make sure you fully explain exactly how these criticisms affect the Ontological argument. Give your own examples.
Explаin eаrned, pаid, and оwned media and give an example оf each.