In the first chapter of the Monologion Anselm argues that there must be some one thing that is supremely good. The Monologion begins with several arguments for the existence of God, arguments at first glance Anselm’s project in the Monologion might seem rather fishy. Ratio, Intelligere, and Cogitare in Anselm’s Ontological ine Nolan – – Proceedings of the American Catholic Philosophical Association.
|Published (Last):||2 April 2018|
|PDF File Size:||5.61 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||7.79 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
For, of what exists as a whole, in any place, there is no part that does not exist in that place. Hence, to any being, to whose spatial extent or duration no bound can be set, either by space or time, no place or time is properly attributed.
Anselm held a council at Lambeth Palace which found that Henry’s beloved Matilda had not technically become a nun and was thus eligible to wed and become queen. Or so it is commonly said: But who can doubt this very being, through which all goods exist, to be a great good?
If, then, in any way it derives existence from nothing, it does so either through itself or through another. Therefore, it will not have an end. Open access to the SEP is made possible by a world-wide funding initiative.
Anselm of Canterbury
When William was killed inhis successor, Henry I, invited Anselm to return to his see. Things that monokogion good through another i. A list up to his own time is provided by McEvoy. But, whatever exists anxelm any of these three ways exists through another than itself, and is of later existence, and, in some sort, less than that through which it obtains existence.
The rational creature was made for loving the Supreme Being.
Internet History Sourcebooks
For, either it is to be understood that it exists as a whole at once, in all places monologjon at all times, and by parts in individual places and times; or, that it exists as a whole, in individual places and times as well. And yet it may be said, after a manner of its own, to be in every place or time, since whatever else exists is sustained by its presence, lest it lapse into nothingness. But I do not doubt that all this solid world, with its parts, just as we see, consists of earth, water, fire, and air.
Military saints Virtuous pagan. For, to him, what is expressing anything, according to this kind of expression, but conceiving of it?
BUT does not this Being, which has been shown to exist as in every way substantially identical with itself, sometimes exist as different from itself, at any rate accidentally? Negligentise mihi esse videtur, si, postquam confirmatius in fide, non studemus quod credimus, intelligere. Archived from the original PDF on For, if none of those things ever existed, in relation to which it is called supreme or greaterit would not be conceived as either supreme or greateryet it would not, therefore, be less good, or suffer detriment to its essential greatness in any degree.
Augustinian theodicy Best of all possible worlds Euthyphro dilemma Inconsistent triad Irenaean theodicy Natural evil Theodicy.
BUT, though it is most certain that the supreme Substance expressed, as it were, within itself the whole created world, which monologioon established according to, and through, this same most profound expression, just as an artisan first conceives in his mind what he afterwards actually executes in accordance with his mental concept, yet I see that this analogy is very incomplete.
But, seeing that one spirit has not any parts, and there cannot be more spirits than one of this kind, it must, by all means, be an indivisible spirit. For example, a horse is better than wood, and a human monologionn is more excellent than a horse. Passing over these relative predications, then, since none of them taken by itself represents the essence of anything, let our attention be turned to the discussion of other kinds of predication. BUT how can objects so different as the creative and the created being be expressed by one Word, especially since that Word itself is coeternal with him who expresses them, while the created world is not coeternal with him?
Humbert’s son Otto was subsequently permitted to inherit the extensive march of Susa through his wife Adelaide in preference to her uncle’s families, who had supported the effort to establish an independent Kingdom of Italy under William the Great of Aquitaine.
But God is that than which no greater can be thought, so he must be omnipotent. Anselm wooed wavering barons to the king’s cause, emphasizing the religious nature of their oaths and duty of loyalty;  he supported the deposition of Ranulf Flambardthe disloyal new bishop of Durham ;  and he threatened Robert with excommunication.
Anselm was understandably reluctant to undertake the primacy of the Church of England under a ruler as ruthless and venal as William, and his tenure as Archbishop proved to be as turbulent and vexatious as he must have feared.
Hence, it does not exist at distinct times, just as it does not exist, as a whole, simultaneously in different individual times. There is a third interpretation, according to which a thing is said to have been created from nothing, when we understand ajselm it was indeed created, but that there is not anything whence it was ansdlm. Eadmer credited Anselm with restraining the pope from excommunicating him,  although others attribute Urban’s politic nature.
But if it does not at all exist everywhere and always, it will exist either finitely in some place or time, or in none.
BUT this model of things, which preceded their creation in the thought of the creator, what else is it than a kind of expression of these things in his thought itself; just as when an artisan is about to make something after the manner of his craft, he first expresses it to himself through a concept? But, if these beings exist through one being, then all things do not exist through more than one, but rather through that one being through which these exist.
Gaunilo’s most famous objection is an argument intended to be exactly parallel to Anselm’s that generates an obviously absurd conclusion.
On the other hand, if that thing is distinct from them, then they do not occupy the highest level after all.
BUT here, in my inquiry concerning the Word, by which the Creator expresses all that he creates, is suggested the word by which he, who creates all, expresses himself.
Another was compiled about fifty years later by John of Salisbury at the behest of Thomas Becket. How it is better conceived to exist everywhere than in every place. For it is greater to exist in reality annselm to exist merely in the understanding. If he expresses himself eternally, his Word is eternally with him. For, then all these there is something better, which is not what they themselves are. Anselm then slept, awoke returned to Aosta, and then retraced his steps before returning to speak to his mother.
The previous Archbishop, Anselm’s old master Lanfranc, had died four years earlier, but the King, William Rufus, had left the see vacant in order to plunder the archiepiscopal revenues. But because he ansekm merciful, he spares the wicked. For, just as place is so distinguished from place that there are individual places, so that which exists as a whole, in one place, is so distinct from that which exists as a whole at the same time, in another place, that there are indiviual wholes. Anselm’s Reply to Gaunilo 8 Once we have formed this idea of that than which a greater cannot be thought, Anselm says, we can see that such a being has features that cannot belong to a possible but non-existent object — or, in other words, that 2 is true.
Thus Anselm opens the Monologion with these words: Monologiln it, Anselm reasoned that even atheists can imagine a greatest being, having such attributes that nothing greater could exist id quo nihil maius cogitari possit.