|
Firefly--
You don't understand the argument. Steps 4 and 5 are what you take to be the conclusion of the argument. The rest of the argument deals with your objection.
Cliche--
That objection doesn't really work. The 'most perfect horse' would have to have all perfections. Since these perfections include omnipotence and omniscience, the 'most perfect horse' would actually be God. Or, assuming you mean rather a horse that exemplies 'horseness' perfectly, it would not exist, since having all perfections is not required by our concept of horse.
CSflim--
Well, because people keep trying to refute or resurrect it. In addition to Anselm, famous philosophers who have made use of some version of it include John Duns Scotus, Descartes, and Plantinga. Famous philosophers who have tried to refute it include Gaunilo and Kant. But, while it certainly looks ridiculous on the face of it, it's notoriously hard to refute.
There's an apocryphal anecdote about the atheist philosopher Betrand Russell. One day, as he was going for a walk, thinking about how to refute the Ontological Argument, he exclaimed, "It works!" and dropped his pipe. Apparently later he figured that that conclusion was a mere mental aberration.
__________________
"Die Deutschen meinen, daß die Kraft sich in Härte und Grausamkeit offenbaren müsse, sie unterwerfen sich dann gerne und mit Bewunderung:[...]. Daß es Kraft giebt in der Milde und Stille, das glauben sie nicht leicht."
"The Germans believe that power must reveal itself in hardness and cruelty and then submit themselves gladly and with admiration[...]. They do not believe readily that there is power in meekness and calm."
-- Friedrich Nietzsche
|