GAUNILO ANDANSELM: DEBATE 311
thinks this thinks of something greater than if it were only in the intellect? What follows
more logically than this: if a being than which none greater is conceivable is only in the
understanding, then it is not such that none greater can be conceived? But surely in no
intellect will you find a thing with both these properties, viz. “greater than which some-
thing is conceivable” and “greater than which nothing is conceivable.” Does it not follow
then that if “a thing greater than which nothing is conceivable” is in any understanding,
then such a thing is not only in the understanding? For if it were, it is “a thing greater than
which something is conceivable,” which is not consistent.
GAUNILO:[6.]...They say that somewhere in the ocean there is an island, which
because of the difficulty, or better, the impossibility of finding what does not exist,
some call the lost island. And they say this island is inestimably wealthy, having all
kinds of delights and riches in greater abundance even than the fabled “Fortunate
Islands.” And since it has no possessor or inhabitant, it excels all other inhabited
countries in its possessions. Now should someone tell me that there is such an island,
I could readily understand what he says, since there is no problem there. But suppose
he adds, as though it were already implied: “You can’t doubt any more that this
island, which is more excellent than any land, really exists somewhere, since you
don’t doubt that it is in your understanding and that it is more excellent not to be in
the understanding only. Hence it is necessary that it really exists, for if it did not, any
land which does would excel it and consequently the island which you already under-
stand to be more excellent would not be such.” If one were to try to prove to me that
this island in truth exists and its existence should no longer be questioned, either I
would think he was joking or I would not know whether to consider him or me the
greater fool, me for conceding his argument or him for supposing he had established
with any certainty such an island’s existence without first showing such excellence to
be real and its existence indubitable rather than just a figment of my understanding,
whose existence is uncertain.
ANSELM:[III.] But you claim our argument is on a par with the following. Someone
imagines an island in the ocean which surpasses all lands in its fertility. Because of the
difficulty, or rather impossibility, of finding what does not exist, he calls it “Lost
Island.” He might then say you cannot doubt that it really exists, because anyone can
readily understand it from its verbal description. I assert confidently that if anyone
finds something for me, besides that “than which none greater is conceivable,” which
exists either in reality or concept alone to which the logic of my argument can be
applied, I will find and give him his “Lost Island,” never to be lost again....
GAUNILO:[7.] This then is an answer the fool [in Proslogion,Ch. 3] could make to
your arguments against him. When he is first assured that this being is so great that its
nonexistence is inconceivable, and that this in turn is established for no other reason
than that otherwise it would not excel all things, he could counter the same way and say:
“When have I admitted there really is any such thing, i.e. something so much greater
than everything else that one could prove to me it is so real, it could not even be con-
ceived as unreal?” What we need at the outset is a very firm argument to show there is
some superior being, bigger and better than all else that exists, so that we can go on
from this to prove all the other attributes such a bigger and better being has to have.