The Seddiqin Argument seems...

The Seddiqin Argument seems, firstly, to be an argument like the ontological one and perhaps as another kind of this argument; but, in spite of some similarities, it differs from the ontological argument. The Seddiqin Argument is similar in that it tries not relying on incomplete, weak, poor facts in the world to prove the existence of the most complete being and to make the argument for proving His existence more evident than other beings that are His effects.

Yet it differs from the ontological argument in the following ways: 1-The ontological argument begins with the meaning of existence, then the meaning of necessary existence all of which are conceptions in the mind; then it endeavors to make this meaning real outside the mind by some reasons. But in the Seddiqin Argument begins with the reality of existence, not its notion; and it continues by searching in this reality.

In other words, the pyramid of existence in the ontological argument is built in the mind then the head of this pyramid - the necessary existence- comes out of the mind and is projected into the reality; in contrast in the Seddiqin Argument this pyramid is a building in reality; stands on its head, which is also real working in the very reality of existence rather than its notion, and its accuracy in the distinction between the notion and the reality of existence have vaccinated this argument against most of the criticisms that have created troubles for the ontological arguments.

2- The problem in the ontological argument is a problem of judgment, while in the Seddiqin Argument the problem is to some extent a problem of presentation and perception.

In all kinds of ontological argument that have been proposed in the view of Anselm, Spinoza, Leibniz, Hartshorn, Malkolm and Plantinga the conception and meaning of God or the Necessary Being is assumed by a definition, and then the argument begins to prove His existence and gives a judgment for its listener about the reality of this meaning.

But, the Seddiqin Argument tries to provide a good presentation of God by some philosophical surveys into the reality of existence that is important for having a good perception from what is intended from God. If someone can have this presentation (that may need some intuitional knowledge), then the judgment about its reality will be clear and evident without any difficulty in proving it.