Anselm’s famous ontological argument has not been found wanting for critics who question its soundness or validity. In spite of the sustained contestation, the argument has managed to continue to persist even after thinkers have declared it defunct. In the spirit of the pursuit of novel ways to analyze and reconsider the argument, I have attempted to develop a way to defend the argument from contemporary critiques. In this article, I have proposed an account of the argument with an alternative interpretation of Anselm’s concept of graded existence as well as his conceivability thesis. I have also reduced the scope of the argument for the purpose of making the argument as widely applicable as possible. In the process, I adopted Saul Kripke’s concept of a rigid designator to suggest that, if a thinker takes seriously the argument against infinite temporal or causal regressions, then that thinker’s metaphysical system has likely already assented to Anselm’s conceivability thesis, as well as a uniquely necessary being or object.
Walton, Corey M.
"Designating the Greatest Possible Being,"
Quaerens Deum: The Liberty Undergraduate Journal for Philosophy of Religion: Vol. 6
, Article 4.
Available at: https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/lujpr/vol6/iss1/4