Kant & ontological proof

The fundamental standards of philosophy are contention for presence of God as a predicate and contention for God’s presence as an essential presence. The main leg of the contention states: God is the best and absolute best being that can be considered. Presence in creative mind and the truth is more noteworthy than presence in creative mind as it were. Consequently, God truly exists. The second leg of the contention is that: God is the substance than which nothing more prominent can be considered. It is more prominent to be vital than not. God must be fundamental. God essentially exists.Kant’s issue with imagined God as confirmation of his genuine presence is introduced on the capacity of everything that is said to exist to have a few highlights or qualities owing to them. He contended that presence isn't a property or the constituent of a thing. Anything that has the property of being non-existent can't in any way, shape or form have some other property. David Humeâ €™s complaint is that nothing can be demonstrated from the earlier. Demonstrating from the earlier is through a contrary inconsistency. The resultant logical inconsistency makes something unfathomable. Nothing can be demonstrated from the earlier, since it is difficult to understand anything not existing.Norman Malcolm, in guarding the possibility of God, keeps up that while the facts may prove that presence of God as a predicate for his world might be impractical, he points out another touch of the contention, which is essential presence. He contends that where the possibility of God, more noteworthy than which nothing can be considered, is conceivable, it is subsequently sensibly predictable that He essentially exists. I concur with Malcolm. God should fundamentally exist with the goal that the presence of different creatures can be followed to Him, who in himself is self existent.REFERENCE.1. Malcolm Norman (Prentice Hall, 1963), Knowledge and Certainty: Essays and Lectures ( Englewood Cliffs, N.).