Search

Anselm of Aosta, also known as Anselm of Bec or Anselm of Canterbury, was an important thinker of the eleventh century. He is best known for his ontological argument for the existence of God, which is still discussed today. Anselm was born in northern Italy and became a wandering scholar before settling at the abbey of Bec in France. He studied under Lanfranc and eventually became the abbot of Bec. Anselm wrote several philosophical works, including the Monologion and the Proslogion, in which he explored the nature of God and made a case for the doctrine of the Trinity. He also engaged in debates with other scholars, such as Gaunilo, and served as the Archbishop of Canterbury. Anselm's legacy is contentious, with some philosophers, like Peter Abelard and Thomas Aquinas, rejecting his conclusions but acknowledging his contribution to applying logic to theological questions. [Extracted from the article]

This article from Philosophy Now presents a fictional story featuring Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer as a philosopher. Rudolph plans to challenge Santa Claus and make the other reindeer and elves question their loyalty. Santa visits Rudolph and is confronted with a philosophical proof arguing against the existence of a happy reality and claiming that Christmas is a scam. Santa disagrees and a heated debate ensues, leading to a threat from Santa's polar bear friend. Santa intervenes and tends to Rudolph's injuries, leading to a reflection on their past and a reconciliation. Ultimately, Santa realizes that a happy reality does exist. It is important to note that this article is a work of fiction and should not be taken as factual information. [Extracted from the article]

Metaphysics Mathematics is mysterious. But instead of conclusively establishing the truth of conventionalism as a philosophical basis for mathematics, my more modest goal here has been to argue that conventionalism is worth considering. I now want to argue that all of the mystery-generating features of mathematics can be neatly accommodated by conventionalism, without either the metaphysical excess of Platonism or the subjectivist confusion of creationism. [Extracted from the article]

Some hints of this soft deism remain in Voltaire, who once cast Christ as a deist; but in Paine the sceptical note against religion is consistently harsh. But she need not be embarrassed by continuing to argue rationally for the existence of a supreme being, as long as she is prepared to enter a more contemporary debate than the one that seems to be played out on deist websites or in the popular deist literature. Knowing God, or Not Deism is belief in the existence of a creator God who does not intervene in the universe, and in particular, in the lives of people. Bob Johnson, a modern deist asserts, "God gave us reason not religion" (Deism: A Revolution in Religion, A Revolution in You, 2009). [Extracted from the article]

This article, titled "Kant in the Café," recounts a fictional encounter between the author, who identifies as Immanuel Kant, and a young man named Hermann in a coffee shop. The conversation revolves around philosophical concepts such as the Thematic Unity of Apperception, the noumenal and phenomenal, and synthetic a priori knowledge. The author also humorously mentions the possibility of Kant drinking another cup of coffee and engages in a debate with St Thomas Aquinas and St Anselm about their proofs of God's existence. The article concludes with the author reflecting on his encounter and returning to revise his work, "Kritik der Reinen Vernunft." [Extracted from the article]

The argument says God, by definition, is the supreme being, and this must entail His existence, otherwise His unique supremacy would not be. Aristotle's concept, divine nous [intellect] was wholly independent of modern references to "God" except, perhaps, in the most fundamental sense, as the unmoved mover. DEAR EDITOR: It is always interesting to consider the ontological argument for God (as expressed by Reverend Dr Peter Mullen in Issue 152), since it raises a point of logic; and this subject is, perhaps counterintuitively, in some ways quite contentious. [Extracted from the article]

The article discusses how the existential risks posed by general artificial intelligence (AI) to humanity can be weighed using the argument of mathematician Blaise Pascal for believing in God. Topics covered include prominent figures that have expressed concerns about the existential risks of AI, objections to Pascal's divine bet, anti-natalist argument against AI and argument associated with political scientist Kenneth Waltz.

Kant, however, rejected Anselm's reasoning, famously arguing that existence "is not a predicate". Knowing God, or Not In one form the Ontological Argument for God is basically the argument: 1) God is by definition the perfect being; 2) It is more perfect for a perfect thing to exist than not exist; 3) Therefore God exists. What Anselm's argument proves is not that because our idea of God is an idea of id quo maius cogitari nequit ["of which nothing can be thought greater"], therefore God exists, but that because our idea of God is an idea of id quo maius cogitate nequit ["that which you can't think of as being more"], we stand [in relation] to a belief in God's existence.". [Extracted from the article]

DAVE MANGNALL, WILMSLOW, CHESHIRE DEAR EDITOR: Excellent breakdown of the Ontological Argument by Peter Mullen in Issue 152. DEAR EDITOR: I read Peter Mullen's article on the Ontological Argument in Issue 152 with a mixture of interest and incredulity. Otherwise, my belief that the Ontological Argument is transparent nonsense, and not even worth discussing, will remain unchallenged. [Extracted from the article]

DAVE MANGNALL, WILMSLOW, CHESHIRE DEAR EDITOR: Excellent breakdown of the Ontological Argument by Peter Mullen in Issue 152. Otherwise, my belief that the Ontological Argument is transparent nonsense, and not even worth discussing, will remain unchallenged. DEAR EDITOR: I read Peter Mullen's article on the Ontological Argument in Issue 152 with a mixture of interest and incredulity. [Extracted from the article]

The article explores there's general scientific agreement that something bad is going on with the world's climate. Contention starts to loom large, however, when the conversation swivels inevitably to why and how that change is happening, and whether we can or even ought to do anything about it. Some people assert that natural cycles traceable over tens of thousands of years are causing the change.

The article presents the author's comments on God's involvement in world creation and his existence as opposed to nothingness. It also discusses the thoughts of St. Thomas Aquinas in the 13th century along with alternate worldviews discussed in philosophical books such as Jim Holt's book, "Why Does the World Exist?."

The questions are difficult and the question of whether God exists - and what we mean by God - particularly so, which is why Benedict O'Connell's agnostic article on "God and Humility" is well worth a read. The brilliant and pious Baruch Spinoza argued that since, by definition, there can be nothing greater than God, it follows that all things in nature must be part of God - or else an even greater God could be conceived who did include them. No doubt the medieval theologians and philosophers so earnestly disputing about God's nature had some preconceptions and preoccupations that seem quaint today, but many of them were penetrating, subtle, patient thinkers. [Extracted from the article]

The article offers the author's insights regarding atheism. Topics discussed include agnosticism which means doubt of a person on the existence of God, claim of atheists that there is no God and being an unbeliever of saving of God of Judaism or Christianity, and the nature of appropriate evidence in relation with atheism and several logics, including credulity, superstition, and foolishness.

The article offers the author's insights on the existence of God. She mentions that it is natural to ask and to have an answer as to why something exists and agrees with theologians that it is reasonable to assume a first cause of how everything was formed. She discusses the formation of atheism, which can be backed by science and physicists discovering the universe. She also suggests that existence itself cannot have a cause.

In this article, the author discusses reasons that support his belief regarding the existence of God. The author highlights previously published stories in different newspapers such as "'Death of God" and disagrees with reasons given in the stories suggesting the death of the God. The reasons mentioned by the author are described argue why anything at all exists, the origin of the universe, and fine-tuning of the universe for intelligent life.

The article presents answers to the question of whether there is a God.

The article offers information on the argument of philosopher, Daniel Kodaj on belief in God causes evil and the religiously-inspired persecution, intolerance, brutal suppression of actual or suspected dissent. It mentions that confessional wars have characterised religion throughout the ages not only against religious institutions, but against the very existence of God. It also mentions his thought that believe in God causes evil.

The article presents an interview with Sylvia Mink and Edgar Brace who discussed the existence of God, the importance of maintenance of things in the Universe, presence of cosmic intelligence, and intricacy. They expressed their views on the concept of the term God, difference of opinion among philosophers, and the order of the Universe.

A letter to the editor is presented in response to the article "Taking Issue with the God Issue."

Two letters to the editor are presented in response to articles "Does God Exist?" by William Lane Craig and "Theism, History and Experience" by Timothy Chappell in the Issue 99.

Several letters to the editor are presented, one in response to an article on correctness of moral and religious beliefs by Van Harvey in a previous issue and the rest in response to an article by William Lane Craig in a previous issue which discusses God's existence.

The article presents an interview with Simon Blackburn, vice president of the British Humanist Association. On being asked his views on atheism, Blackburn mentioned that atheism is linked with intelligible question about the existence of God. Blackburn revealed reasons that led him to become an infidel, his strongest argument against God's existence, and his views on the existence of the universe.

A letter to the editor is presented in response to the article on using the Ockham's razor principle to eliminate the existence of God.

A letter to the editor is presented in response to the article on the scientific understanding of the universe and the existence of God.

A letter to the editor is presented in response to the article "The Absurd Heroics of Monsieur Mersault."

A letter to the editor is presented in response to the article "The Gods of Spinoza and Teilhard de Chardin" on existence of God in the issue 106.

An introduction is presented which discusses various articles within the issue on topics including the idea of charity on Christmas, aspects of natural world as evidence for God's existence, and importance of moral values in real-life problems and dilemmas.

A letter to the editor is presented in response to the article "A Plague on Both Their Houses," by Mary Midgley from issue 64.