|
Gaunilo or Gaunillon ( century) was a Benedictine monk of Marmoutier Abbey in Tours, France. He is best known for his contemporary criticism of the ontological argument for the existence of God which appeared in St Anselm's ''Proslogion''. In his work ''On Behalf of the Fool'', Gaunilo contends that St Anselm's ontological argument fails because logic of the same kind would force one to conclude many things exist which certainly do not.〔''An Introduction to the Philosophy of Religion'', Michael J. Murray and Michael Cannon Rea, Cambridge University Press, 2008, pg. 126.〕 An empiricist, Gaunilo thought that the human intellect is only able to comprehend information provided by the senses.〔''The History of Theology: Middle Ages'', Giulio D'Onofrio and Basil Studer, Liturgical Press, 2008, pg. 155.〕 Little beyond this essay is known of Gaunilo; no other extant writings bear his name. Anselm wrote a reply to it, essentially arguing that Gaunilo had missed his point. ==The "Lost Island" refutation== Anselm claimed his ontological argument as proof of the existence of God, whom he described as that being for which no greater can be conceived. A god that does not exist cannot be that than which no greater can be conceived, as existence would make it greater. Thus, according to St. Anselm, the concept of God necessarily entails His existence. He denies Gaunilo a Godless epistemology.〔''Anselm of Canterbury: The beauty of Theology'', David S. Hogg, Ashgate Publishing, Ltd., 2004, pg. 104.〕 Gaunilo criticised Anselm's argument by employing the same reasoning, via ''reductio ad absurdum'', to "prove" the existence of the mythical "Lost Island", the greatest or most perfect island conceivable: if the island of which we are thinking does not exist, it cannot be the greatest conceivable island, for, to be the greatest conceivable island, it would have to exist, as any existent island would be greater than an imaginary one. This, of course, is merely a direct application of Anselm's own premise that existence is a perfection. Since we can conceive of this greatest or most perfect conceivable island, it must, by Anselm's way of thinking, exist. While this argument is absurd, Gaunilo claims that it is no more so than Anselm's. Philosophers often attempt to prove the ontological argument wrong by comparing Anselm's with Gaunilo's. The former runs: # God is that being than which no greater can be conceived. # It is greater to exist in reality than merely as an idea. # If God does not exist, we can conceive of an even greater being, ''that is'' one that ''does'' exist. # Therefore, God must indeed exist in reality. Gaunilo's parody runs along the same lines: # The Lost Island is that island than which no greater can be conceived. # It is greater to exist in reality than merely as an idea. # If the Lost Island does not exist, one can conceive of an even greater island, that is one that does exist. # Therefore, the Lost Island exists in reality. If one of these arguments is sound, it has been asserted, they must both be sound. By Gaunilo's reckoning, however, one (and, therefore, the other, too) is unsound. The Lost Island does not exist, so there is something wrong with the logic that proves that it does. Because the argument proves true in one case that which is patently false (the Lost Island), it is fair to ask whether it may fairly be regarded as proving true the other case. The fact that there is no perfect island is put forth by Gaunilo as showing that Anselm's argument for God's existence is flawed. Such objections are called overload objections: they do not claim to show where or how the argument goes wrong; they merely argue that, if it is unsound in one application, it is unsound in all others.〔"Philosophy of Religion." Gaunilo of Marmoutiers Objection to AnselmÂs Argument. N.p., n.d. Web. 30 Sept. 2012. 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「Gaunilo of Marmoutiers」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|