solved When first looking at the argument in general I want

When first looking at the argument in general I want to make clear two things. Omniscience is ‘all knowing’ for example the narrator of a story who is speaking as if he or she already knows what has happened or is going to happen and that ‘divine’ relates to a ‘God’ or the ‘perfect being.’ Secondly, it is important to know what ‘free will’ is. ‘Free Will’ is the ability to make one’s own choice or act at one’s own discretion. While referencing the questions about Divine Omniscience and the challenges associated with free will it is important to understand what we are discussing (Borland, p 1). Basically free will circumscribes to the idea that I will make my own decision about my own life and there is no preplanned life for me or whoever the person in question is. However when looking at Divine Omniscience belief and the ability to ‘prove’ that the existence of a ‘God’ is irrefutable….it hinges on the belief that every action is preordained. Is preplanned. For example, if I make it choice, it is God’s choice, not mine. Because of this, and the belief that ‘God’ is omniscience and knows what has been, is, and will be [basically think of Charles Dickens in ‘A Christmas Carol’]…this all knowing being tells you what is, will be, and is presently going on…but the difference between Dickens and God is that in Dickens’ story the Scrooge is able to make different choices based on what he sees. However when looking at the argument presented before, it’s more along the lines of…you can see but would still make the same choice….Borland, Tully. “Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.” Omniscience and Divine Foreknowledge. https://iep.utm.edu/omnisci/ date accessed June 2, 2021……………Hello Class,This week I decided to answer the second question. With reference to Anselm’s Ontological Argument for the existence of God, evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of his argument. This was a very interesting read because it played into how we thought of God. The Ontological Argument is that “God, being defined as most great or perfect, must exist, since a God who exists is greater that a God who does not.” The main strength found in that argument is that it brings to light how the concept of God isn’t unreasonable. This shows everyone that there is an idea of God in your mind and because of this thought, it correlates to the idea that God exists. However, there are a few weaknesses within this argument. Guanilo argued that this line of thinking could then be used to prove that mythical things can exist as well. Since we can think of a great unicorn, then there must be one that exists when you apply it to Anselm’s argument. Another weakness pointed out was by Kant and the use of the word “existence.” He argued that the word had “nothing to the concept of an essence.” This was supported by an example of dollar bills. The argument was between a real dollar bill and an imaginary one. Both have the same characteristics but lacks essence. -this is the second response