Anselm's Argument For The Existence Of God

Anselm`s view about God is that his existence in our minds proves the existence of him in reality. Trying to prove that he does not in fact exist, contradicts the purpose, since as attempting to convince others that he does not exist, you recognize his being. As you attempt to argue against God while completely understanding the meaning of God, you recognize this idea of the “greatest being”. About “the fool who says in his heart“ that God doesn’t exist, Anselm argues that there are two ways for something to be said ”in the heart”. One is that the object is understood when the word for the object is created, another is when the actual object is understood in entirety. Like Gaunilo, I disagree with Anselm`s views. Gaunilo argues against Anselm in one way with his “Lost Island” example, as something that only exists in the mind cannot be greater than everything. Even if this statement does not thoroughly argue against it, I still disagree with the Ontological Argument with the point that someone who completely understand God can still
Even if everyone has an agreement that there is a “greater” being, there are different views about such “greater” being. Some picture god, some picture natural laws in motion without the need of an unmoved-mover, etc. All humans will have a different version of the “greater being”. Of course there may be arguments that the thought process on the way to realizing that there is such a higher power, do not matter as long as the conclusion is reached; like maze of paths that reach the same center. However, I would state the reasons behind the thought of such a being do matter, as they provide clues as to the rules and laws of nature. If this greater being is in control of the entire world, then there should be some rules or sort of common factors that we could possible