Proslogion, with the Replies of Gaunilo and Anselm Book

I've read the 'Monologion', 'Proslogion' and Anselm's debates about them more than once, always in connection to a college class, as well as some of the modern debates about the ontological argument. For an eleventh century cleric to have remained so problematic for so long is quite remarkable.

The most interesting treatment given the texts, particularly of the 'Proslogion', was that offered by Dr. Paul Schaick in his fall Philosophy of Religion class. A PhD in physics who had gone on for a second doctorate in philosophy after reading Heidegger, Paul was an interesting man.

His class barely touched on the philosophy of religion at all. We read Rudolf Otto's 'Idea of the Holy' very quickly, discussing it in a day, then moved immediately to spend the rest of the semester reading Anselm and his critics. Class "discussions" were almost entirely devoted to watching Paul at the whiteboard, feverishly writing proofs in modal logics. It eventually dawned on him that we didn't know modal logics, so he deigned to give us a crash course in that, then proceeded with his work. This, I presume, is how they taught physics where he came from.

In any case, I found it amusing and the two of us became friends until graduation in the spring.

Oh, just in case you are interested, the argument does work under the operations allowed under S5 modal logic, but not in the others.--If that doesn't solve your crisis of faith, what will?