Wednesday, November 27, 2019

Analysis of Anselms Ontological Argument free essay sample

This premise does not state that God’s strengths as this argument is to prove his existence, not whether or not God is all-powerful, all-knowing and all-good. The second premise means this greatest possible being is either an imaginary being that one has thought of or, a being that we not only is not only thought of but also exists. The third premise and its sub premises states because existing in reality is greater than existing in thought, then the God we have thought of exists in reality or there must be a greater, or more perfect, being that does exist and that being is God. This leads to the conclusion, if you accept the premises then you accept the existence of the greatest being possible, God. This concept of God’s existence is also led with the idea that God is a necessary being, a being that is not dependent of something greater in order to exist. We will write a custom essay sample on Analysis of Anselms Ontological Argument or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page If God relied on another being, like how a children rely on parents to conceive them, then this being called God is not God because it would be imperfect. Therefore, there must be another to call God that meets all the requirements for perfection. One of the first popular objections was created by Gaunilo of Marmoutiers. The premise and conclusion to Gaunilo’s argument is identical to Anselm’s argument except with the replacement of the word â€Å"God† with â€Å"the Lost island† and the word â€Å"being† with â€Å"island†. As simple as that, though Gaunilo’s argument is completely absurd, Gaunilo’s reductio ad absurdum also proves to be as deductively valid as Anselm’s argument. However, this â€Å"Lost Island† could in no way exist. The absurdity and validity of â€Å"the lost island† quickly brought up questions as to how Anselm’s Argument cannot be absurd. Anselm’s argument was not proven invalid until Immanuel Kant, a german philosopher during the 18th century, proposed an objection that would be the decisive blow to the Ontological argument (Immanuel Kant. Wiki). Kant’s objection is how existence is not a predicate (Mike, screen 25). A predicate is used to describe something the subject (this being God in Anselm’s Argument) is doing. In Aselm’s Argument, Anselm premise rely on that being conceived and existing in reality is something that describes God. This rationality does not follow because to exist or conceive does not describe the subject, it only tells us whether it exist or not. Much like how fictional characters do not exist, describing cartoon for example would tell us details of what this cartoon looks like, what its habits are and common antics it goes through, but not whether it exists or not. The question of existence must fall in a separate argument that does not define the character. As there are Arguments to prove God, there are debatable arguments to disprove the God. The First version of â€Å"The Argument from Evil† goes as follow: 1. If God were to exist, then that being would be all-powerful, all-knowing, and all-good. 2. If an all-PKG existed, then there would be no evil. . There is evil. [Conclusion] Hence, there is no God (Sober, 109) The first premise is the definition of what God would be if he were to exist. That is a being that has the power to do anything, had knowledge of everything throughout the span of time and is in all ways good. The second premise is created with the first premise in mind. To expand on the second premise i t states, if God were all-powerful he could stop any form of evil from happening, if he is all knowing then he has knowledge of when evil will occur and if he is all-good then God would stop all evil from happening. If god cannot stop all evil from happening then the definition of God must be incorrect. He then must not be powerful enough to stop all evil, and/or he doesn’t know when evil until it has already occurred and/or good is not all good in that God does not wish to stop all evils. The third premise is stating the fact that there is evil in the world. The conclusion derived since that there is evil, then is what may be defined as God must be lacking in one or two of his qualities and therefore God, by definition, does not exist at all. In order for God to be compatible with evil, God must only allow the evils that would, in turn, lead to a greater amount of good and must take the route that leads to the least amount of evil to gain the greatest amount of good. The soul building defense was created in mind that evil and God co-exist in our world. The defense is that without any evil in the world, our souls would not nurture, or, understand the concept of evil. This defense does not hold true because there has been many evils in the world that seem unacceptable, even though it may have been for the purpose of soul building. God, and all-good being, would then only allow the evils that are essential in soul-building. This would only mean that evil that man commits against man. The reason for this is because anything that happens in nature exceeds soul-building essentials. Another defense is God having given us free will, humans ultimately are the causes of this evil. That is true but the common objection to this is that human do more than enough evil to ourselves, it is going too far to have God throw tornados, volcanic eruptions, and hurricanes at us too. At what point do human have such control over nature. The last defense is that God simply works in mysterious ways. Who can explain why natural events take so many lives and injure many others or why some children have to go through great deals of suffering and live through it? It is God’s way and ultimately, no matter how incomprehensible the evil is, it is for the greater good. Certainly the question to God’s existence has been pondered upon by philosophers for over a very long period of time with no progress as whether God exists or not. The ontological argument created by Anselm withstood a great deal of criticism until it was disproved by Kant over 600 years after the fact.

Sunday, November 24, 2019

Franny and Zooey essay3 essays

Franny and Zooey essay3 essays Knowledge can at once be the most andleast sought after of entities. Throughout the novel Franny and Zooey, Franny Glass is engaged in a bout within, all due to her inability to separate her spiritual beliefs from her life. Following in the footsteps of her brother,Seymour, Franny begins to take measures in order to become one withherself. Deeply rooted in the storyis the premise of the importance of family. Through experience of his own, Frannys brother, Zooey, was able toleave Franny in a state of happiness, free of the mental baggage she had pickedup over the afore mentioned sequence of events. Fed up with her acquisitive boyfriend,Franny returns home to recuperate from her spiritual breakdown in the restroom of Sicklers. Her date, ending with her insensible, sent her back home with quite a reclusive disposition. Enter Zooey Glass, whilst bathing, his mother as well as Frannys, badgered him for a myriad while about talking to and hopefully helping her youngest. I dont suppose youve spoken to your little sister yet she said I dont thinkthats nice, I dont think thats nice at all. I asked you particularly to please go see if theres anything pp. 77 With the words of a mother, Bessie Glass finallyconvinced her son to talk to troubled, young Franny, thus shedding light on thenew, pious practices adopted by the girl. This enforces the concept of domestic support being a key factor, notonly to her well-being, but as a cornerstone of the novel. With obliging to talk to his sister,Zooey stepped into a snare; until he felt Franny was all right he wouldntleave in response to his previous commitments. Turning down a lunch date that pertained to his professional future toinstead aid his sister is also a definite sign that he truly cared; he didntdeliver the lecture to get his irritating mother off his back, as the case may havebeen. I know all youre saying. Youre not telling me one thing I havent thoughtof by myself. Youre saying I want som...

Thursday, November 21, 2019

Back to Basics at Westbank Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words

Back to Basics at Westbank - Essay Example In other words, Ms. Jones must have a serious meeting with members of the board and make sure that the company is heading in the right direction, and that everyone in the company is ‘on the same page,’ as it were. If the company does not have a common goal (or goals), now is the time to do it, since the departure of Mr. Smith definitely heralds a new and exciting time in WestBank’s history. Now the company can start afresh, knowing that it has had some failures in the past with securing student overdrafts as did HSBC, but now it is flailing amidst the sundry musings of a—most likely—underpaid and underinformed work force. Therefore, it is up to Ms. Jones to set the company aright, although, truth be told, she cannot do this alone—she needs help. Most definitely, one of the key elements to her success is how the board meeting goes. She must find the unity of the company’s mindset, generally, in order to know how to proceed and take the d irection of the company. II. WestBank’s Former Reputation (325 words) Obviously, WestBank got into a lot of trouble by backing a bunch of unsecured debts, and that is basically where it ran into troubles. Let’s hope that WestBank doesn’t eventually do what happened to HSBC’s original parent company. â€Å"[Britain’s Midland Bank] was the biggest in the world in 1934, and then went into a slow decline, eventually being taken over by HSBC in 1992, changing its name to HSBC Bank plc in 1999† (Siklos, Bohl, & Wohar, 2010, pp. 168). In order to maintain the WestBank brand, it is of premier importance that all of WestBank’s dealings be transparent with Premier, the parent company. That was not the case at HSBC. â€Å"At HSBC, the bank was 'happy to discuss some of the finer detail in private meetings, but prefer[red] to restrict circulation of the internal policies themselves'† (De Neve, 2008, pp. 249). Another bank, Santander, was e stablished by having replaced various UK banks that had formerly been well-known. â€Å"[Banco Santander] is headquartered at the Ciudad Financeria Santander (Santander Financial City) in Madrid and employs around 130,000 people worldwide. The history of BSCH began in 1857 when Banco Santander was established by royal decree†¦Ã¢â‚¬  (Wankel, 2009, pp. 106). It still holds significant appeal for the UK in the Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS). â€Å"In January 2000 Santander's holding in RBS peaked at about 10 percent. Later, Santander's support was critical to the success of RBS's bid for National Westminster, completed in March 2000† (Guillen, 2005, pp. 109). One of the mistakes that WestBank must learn from in its past is to not make the same mistakes in the future. In the next section it will be discussed what is currently the state of this particular bank and what it has to do to overcome its obstacles—and what Ms. Jones is going to have to do to make WestBank a winning brand once again. Obviously, there are steps which must be taken now to ensure success. III. WestBank’s Current Dilemma (300 words) WestBank’s current dilemma is very similar to that of what HSBC went thorugh. Right now, HSBC is going through a difficult time. â€Å"[For HSBC, t]he first-quarter reading was in line with the long-run series average of 54.9. Still, the