I have always found this argument to be initially difficult to grasp however once understood it seems to be one of the most ambitious arguments from natural theology and potentially one of the most powerful. This is because this argument is the only argument for God that is attempting to be a deductive proof by definition, while other arguments seek to be based on induction. It is interesting how Anselm is saying that if the being you are imagining doesn't exist then that is by definition not God and he seeks to demonstrate some connection between out ability to conceive of something and the existence of a thing. I prefer the modal ontological argument by Alvin Plantinga because I can see how the idea that existence is a quality to be problematic. The contemporary version of this argument seeks to get away from this problem. I find it interesting to see how Anselm tries to address the potential counter to his argument of being able to conceive of God not existing.
