From the very first paragraph we learn that Anselm makes presumptions about the reader , “Give yourself over to God”. As the readers are given were little information about “God” as a being, rather are expected to know who and what he is and symbolises. Most arguments claim that it was not written to convert readers, but was simply written to help the reader understand God and his existance within us and the world. In the second paragraph he addresses questions that the reader may have about his awareness of the subject. The use of Rhetorical questions in the paragraph make the reader think in much more depth about their answer and the one they perceive him to have. These may be seen as questions which ask for a much more personal response (convertion?). Repetitive questions build up frustration within the reader, “He was rich, we are beggars”. Here Anselm refers to “the fall” and argues that we are baring Adams sin (story of how we first cam eto being, The Bible) and due to Adams misconduct a distance was created between man and God. At the end of chapter one, he outlines the whole basis of his argument “unless I believe I shall not understand”, stating that he already believes in God, but those who do not will not understand. This also suggests ignorance to the minority of those who were not Christian and gives them a ‘less intelligent’ demeanour.
Anselm centres his argument on the basis of God being the greatest thought man can think and imagine, “And indeed we believe you are something greater than which cannot be thought”. His statement actually shows how he believes God is not a thought but real. In the second chapter he uses an analogy of a painter to help explain his argument. He states that when a painter plans what he will paint, he has the finished picture in his mind yet he knows that it does not exists yet, because he has not created it. Once painted, he has it in his mind and knows it exists because he has painted it. Therefore, people who do not believe in god (“the fool”) must think that God does not exists because when you cannot understand something it is always in your mind. Once they realise and understand god, he becomes a reality, which is greater and more powerful than a thought. However, some argue that you can think or believe something is true, but that does not make it real in reality. One argument states, “ a man can dream of flying with wings, but once awake, he realises he has none”. Gaunilo, a monk from the abbey of Marmoutier, was a critic of the Ontological argument and argued that if you have a thought of something, doesn’t necessarily make it reality. Anselm counterattacked this by the simple fact that we are able to compare God to objects and matter, therefore it means it is the greatest thought you can have, thus he must exist.
Throughout Proslogian, within the ontological argument, Anselm supposes that it is impossible for anybody to think a thought greater than God, he believes that everyone’s greatest though is God and he fails to see how some individuals may have differing opinions. He believes that what exists in our minds must exist in reality. However, does that mean, if we think of something perfectious, it definitely exists? Perfection is subjective and everybody has different views on what they find perfectious. . Anselm and most people of his time had a similar view of God, they believed in the God of Classical Theism, but nowadays, people have different interpretations of God so does that mean all our interpretations are reality? Thus it can be said that the ontological argument doesn’t help us understand God, but simply raises more questions.
