Conclusion The existence of God is an important topic in philosophy and efforts to prove or disprove his existence have been taking place since the dawn of time. Notable philosophers such as René Descartes, Saint Thomas Aquinas, and William Paley all devised arguments to prove the existence of God. Although there are many other arguments along the same lines, those offered by the three aforementioned thinkers carry the most weight. This does not mean, however, that their arguments are flawless. The teleological argument is far superior to other arguments because it has the fewest flaws in proving the existence of God. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get the original essay The ontological argument has no strong, justifiable argument for the existence of God and the cosmological argument defeats itself as it turns into an infinite loop proven later. in the test. First of all, the ontological argument is an argument that comes from nothing but is rational. It is an a priori with vital premises for concluding that God exists. The ontological argument was created by Saint Anselm of Canterbury in the 11th century CE. He used the concept of “a being beyond which nothing greater can be conceived” to expand on the existence of God (plato.stanford.edu). René Descartes had a position similar to that of Saint Anselm. Descartes claims to provide proof demonstrating the presence of God based on the possibility of a remarkably perfect being. Descartes also argues that "there is no less contradiction in conceiving a supremely perfect being devoid of existence than in conceiving a triangle whose interior angles do not add up to 180 degrees" (plato.stanford.edu). Thus, he reasoned that since people believe in a perfect being, they have an idea of ​​a perfect being which results in the conclusion that a perfect being exists. However, the ontological argument has its weaknesses. Gaunilo criticized this argument. He argued that it is possible to create an argument having the same form as the ontological argument. Gaunilo suggests that using the same form of ontological argument, it is possible to prove the existence of the perfect island: "the perfect island must exist, because if it did not, then it would be possible to conceive an island greater than that which nothing greater can be conceived” (existence-of-god.com). If the ontological argument prevails, then the perfect island argument also works. If both arguments have the same form, then they succeed or fail together. Furthermore, Immanuel Kant also has an objection against the ontological argument. His position on the subject is that “existence is not a predicate, a property that a thing can possess or lack” (existence-of-god.com). When people believe that God exists, it does not mean that there is a God and that He has the property of existing. If that were the case, then when people declared that God does not exist, they would mean that there is a God and that He does not have the property of existing. This means that people would both confirm and deny the existence of God. Then another argument used to justify the existence of God is the cosmological argument. First introduced by Thomas Aquinas, the cosmological argument asserts that the existence of the universe is strong evidence for the creator of the world we live in, God. The argument also claims that the existence of the universe requires an explanation and that the only acceptable explanation is that it was created by God. Some claim that the creation and existence of the universe is a brute fact. They defend that justifying the existence of an imperative being. 4).