[234] a justification for their defence, namely that the experience of unconditional or ultimate concern is an element of our very being and therefore has ultimate certainty. As far as that, we can go; beyond this, we cannot go. To make from this a conclusion, in terms of arguments, to the existence of a highest being, was the fantasy of the Anselmian^a argument. Or when we come to the cosmological argument^b, then we look at the world, at ourselves IN the world, and we find our finitude, our having-to-die, our anxiety,^c our loneliness, and when we find all this, then we ask the question of something which might OVERCOME contingency, which might have ultimate necessity, or which might OVERCOME anxiety, which might gives us the courage, the ultimate courage, to take this anxiety into ourselves. This is alright. And one can say, with a slight exaggeration, that a large part of what existentialist ^danalyses have done today---and in former centuries where they first appeared---are nothing else but extended cosmological analyses, analyses as they were present in the cosmological argument. But to make from there the conclusion to the existence of a highest being, somewhere ABOVE finitude and anxiety, is a conclusion for which there is no logical necessity or even possibility. And for this I don't need to go to Kant^e, who has tried to show this, convincingly; but already Duns Scotus, ^fthe great Medieval philosopher of the 13th century, showed, against Thomas Aquinas^g, that there is no jump in terms of arguments from conclusions, from the finite to the infinite. Finally the teleological arguments^h are not arguments at all. To say there is MEANING in the world, in history, in art, in nature, in organism---this description is certainly true, but if this description is made into the basis for a conclusion of a CREATOR of all this, then this conclusion is not valid. As many philosophers have shown, it only leads to the description of the structure of reality to be ambiguous, to have meaning and meaninglessness, to have structure and destruction, but it by no means can lead us to a highest being who is the CAUSE of meaning.