A comparative study of Ontological Argument Based on Anselm's and Naraghi Interpretation and its Epistemological Origin

The ontological proof of God's existence is a highly controversial argument sought after by Western philosophers and Islamic thinkers. To compare the discourse between the Western and Muslim perspectives, this research examines the initial coherent statements of Anselm and Naraghi, finding complete similarity in both propositions. The starting point of this argument is the concept of God as a being beyond which nothing greater or superior can be imagined, a premise accepted by Naraghi as well. The research seeks a common knowledge basis between these two thinkers, revealing similarities that demonstrate the existence of God as an inherent and unquestionable truth for both. Acknowledging this innate knowledge of God plays a crucial role in establishing the argument's premise. By neglecting the epistemological origin of this argument, certain challenges raised by individuals like Gunilo can be addressed and resolved.