gs within our human fathoming can be proved by definitions alone. To take another example, mathematical and geometrical concepts can exist by their precepts alone, and their properties can be determined by this. It is impossible, for example, to imagine a square circle or a triangle with four sides, so indeed it is impossible to envisage some things which can come about from their definition alone. Although some arguments for the existence of God are based on empirical information, such as the Teleological Argument (a.k.a. the Design Argument), the concept of God as a highest possible being does not require such evidence as a proof.

As it was originally formulated, the ontological argument rests on the following premises:

Premise 1: It is a conceptual truth (or, so to speak, true by definition) that God is a being than which none greater can be imagined (that is, the greatest possible being that can be imagined)

Premise 2: God exists as an idea in the mind.

Premise 3: A being that exists as an idea in the mind and in reality is, other things being equal, greater than a being that exists only as an idea in the mind.

Premise 4: Thus, if God exists only as an idea in the mind, then we can imagine something that is greater than God (that is, a greatest possible being that does exist).

Premise 5: But we cannot imagine something that is greater than God (for it is a contradiction to suppose that we can imagine a being greater than the greatest possible being that can be imagined.)

Conclusion: Therefore, God exists.

Based on these premises, we obtain the following broad ideas which fundamentally underpin the ontological argument. Firstly, as expressed in Premise 2, we have a coherent idea of a being that The first, expressed by Premise 2, is that we have a coherent idea of a being that instantiates all of the perfections. To say things in a different way, Premise 2 asserts that we possess coherent idea of a being that instantiates every property