existent of god
... The premise of the Ontological Argument surrounds the idea that God is the greatest conceivable being, and because something existing in reality is greater than existing in the imagination, then it rings true that God, being the greatest conceivable being, exits in reality. ... One can believe that “God” existing cannot be so, however they can at least understand that “God” existing can be tangible in the understanding. It would stand to reason that for the very reason they understand the statement of “God” existing that they can then form an opinion from it whereby they disagree with it. ... If God is only the greatest conceivable being in understanding, then Something could actually be greater, for the Something that would be greater than god would exist in reality, which is greater than imagination. However, God is the greatest conceivable being, and when something is the greatest it is not surpassed by something greater. ... Therefore, God being the greatest conceivable being must not only exist in the understanding, but must also exist in reality. The criticism here, lies in the fact that the Ontological Argument presupposes that one of God’s characteristics is that he exists, stated through the claim that he is a “being”. ... Existence does represent an aspect of the idea of an object but in the Ontological argument it is attributing existence as a quality to God, but again this is not allowed to be a characteristic. The argument is in essence; tying to describe God by using words that are incapable of description and therefore the Ontological Argument is inconclusive. ... To clarify, The Cosmological Argument is assuming that the only reason for saying there is a God is because one has to stop somewhere. However, why cannot one stop at the mentality that contingent things are self-existent, and their coming about is explained within itself?