Argumentum Ontologicum and Argumentum Ornithologicum: Anselm of Canterbury and Jorge Luis Borges

  • J. L. Usó-Doménech
  • J. A. Nescolarde-SelvaEmail author
  • H. Gash


In this paper, the authors attempt to prove there is a relationship between Borges’ “Argumentum ornithologicum” and Anselm’s argument “Argumentum ontologicum”. We suggest Borges, using the image of a flock of birds, with oriental reminiscences, half joking, half serious attempts to prove the existence of God. We demonstrate the fallacies incurred by Borges and why his “Argumentum” has no place within the traditional set of ontological arguments. However, it would easy to forget that Borges’ claim is not philosophical, nor theological, nor apologetic, but rather ironic or paradoxical.


A posteriori reasoning A priori reasoning God Modal logic Ontological argument Scholastic 



  1. Aizenberg, E. (1986). El Tejedor del Aleph, Kabala y Judaismo en Borges. Altalena, Madrid. (in Spanish). Google Scholar
  2. Anselm. (2008 [1953]). Obras Completas 1. Translation, introduction and notes by Julián Alameda. BAC. (in Spanish).Google Scholar
  3. Aquinas. (2012). Corpus Thomisticum. Opera omnia. Recognovit ac instruxit Enrique Alarcón automato electronico Pompaelone ad Universitatis Studiorum Navarrensis aedes a MM A.D.
  4. Borges, J. L. (1996). Obras completas. Buenos Aires: Emecé. (in Spanish).Google Scholar
  5. Cantarino, V. (1976). Borges, Filósofo de Dios: Argumentum ornithologicum. Thesaurus, XXI(2), 288–299. (in Spanish).Google Scholar
  6. Dennett, D. (1992). Consciouness explained. New York: Back Bay Books.Google Scholar
  7. Descartes, R. (1982). Meditaciones filosóficas Anagrama, Madrid. Available at: (in Spanish).
  8. Frankel, E. (1989, 1993). The classic tales: 4,000 years of Jewish Lore. Northvale: Jason Aronson.Google Scholar
  9. Gaunilón. (1952). Libro escrito a favor de un insensato, apud san Anselmo de Canterbury, “Obras Completas”. Madrid: BAC. (in Spanish).Google Scholar
  10. Garcia de la Garza, E. (San Pedro Garza García). El Dios del silogismo. (in Spanish).
  11. Magnavacca, S. (2009). Filósofos medievales en la obra de Borges. Buenos Aires: Miño y Dávila Editores. (in Spanish).Google Scholar
  12. Nuño, J. (2005). La filosofía en Borges. Editorial: Reverso. (in Spanish).Google Scholar
  13. Oppy, G. (2001). Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy.
  14. Reinstadler. S. (1937). Elementa philosophiae scholasticae (16th ed., 2 Vols.). Freiburg: Herder.Google Scholar
  15. Rios, R. H. (2018). Borges y el anillo del ser. Un estudio sobre literatura y metafísica. Madrid: Editorial Verbum.Google Scholar
  16. Russell, B. (1919). Introduction to mathematical philosophy. London: G. Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
  17. Usó-Doménech, J. L., Nescolarde-Selva, J., Belmonte-Requena, M., & Gash, H. (2015). Walking through Cantor’s paradise and Escher’s garden: Epistemological reflections on mathematical infinite (I). Cybernetics and Systems, 46(6–7), 423–437.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Applied MathematicsUniversity of AlicanteAlicanteSpain
  2. 2.Education Department, St Patrick’s CollegeDublin City UniversityDublinIreland

Personalised recommendations