Midweek update 2

The Anselm window at Canterbury Cathedral

I've stuffed this bit into a text box because it interrupts the flow of my argument but I don't think I can get away with not addressing it:

 On my interpretation of Anselm’s argument, it will turn out that Anselm doesn’t actually rely on the premise that existence is a perfection; but the discussion of this premise is such a traditional part of accounts of Anselm that I feel bound not to pass over it in silence. The standard objection to this premise is expressed in Kant’s slogan that “exists is not a predicate” or “existence is not a perfection.” The idea is that, contrary to the assumption Gaunilo thinks Anselm is making, existence in reality is not greater than existence in the understanding. Existence is not like wisdom or good looks or the ability to play the piano; it’s not a feature that makes a thing better than it would otherwise be.

            To see why someone would take this objection seriously, imagine this scenario (which I adapt from the American philosopher Norman Malcolm). Suppose there is a vacancy on the Supreme Court, and the President of the United States sends two of his advisers into separate rooms with instructions to make a list of all the qualities that the best possible nominee will have. After an hour, the advisers return with their lists. Adviser A lists such qualifications as “has at least three years’ experience on a federal appeals court, has judicial philosophy x, has particular expertise in y,” and so forth. Adviser B presents the exact same list except that at the end, she has written “exists.” Has Adviser B described a better nominee than Adviser A? Clearly not: she has described exactly the same nominee, only with an irrelevant flourish at the end. A nominee who doesn’t exist won’t have any of the other desirable qualities either.