Final answer:
The conceivability argument originates from Anselm's ontological argument, which asserts that the greatest conceivable being must exist as it is greater to exist in reality than merely in the mind. The argument has faced critiques over the centuries, particularly regarding its application to a greatest conceivable evil being, and issues with the concept of necessary existence.
Step-by-step explanation:
The Conceivability Argument and Its Evolution
The conceivability argument has its roots in philosophical discourse surrounding the existence and nature of God. Stemming primarily from the work of Anselm, Archbishop of Canterbury, in the eleventh century, the argument is a form of ontological argument. Anselm's original formulation sought to prove God's existence by arguing that the concept of a being than which no greater can be conceived must exist in reality because it exists in the mind; to exist in reality is greater than existing solely in the mind.
The argument evolved over centuries, facing critiques and adaptations. Notably, the idea that just as the greatest conceivable being must necessarily exist, an equally logical conclusion could be drawn about a greatest conceivable evil being, highlights flaws in the ontological approach as it pertains to proving the existence of a deity through the necessity of existence. The debate expanded further with philosophers like Clarke and his "Argument from Contingency," and later criticisms such as the "Fallacy of Composition" and the challenges to infinite causation without a beginning.
Despite its longevity, the ontological argument and related cosmological arguments have remained controversial, with philosophers such as Hume and later critics like Moore, raising doubts about their efficacy. The debate ultimately illustrates the complexity of philosophical argumentation, particularly when addressing the existence of abstract entities like a deity or supreme being.