virtuallylucid

So yesterday I was reviewing my philosophy material, since I have a test next Wednesday. I was driving with my daughter, age 7, to the library and I decided that I would "discuss" the subject with her, as that is reportedly the best way to learn something. We started with St. Anselm's ontological argument for the existence of God.

For those of you who aren't familiar with St. Anselm (a goodly number, I suppose), his argument is roughly this:

1) God is the greatest being that can be conceived.
2) A being that actually exists is, by definition, greater than one which is just an idea
3) Therefore the greatest being, God, must actually exist.

After explaining this to my daughter, I asked her if she had any questions.

She said "Well, couldn't you just say that about anything? You could say that an ice cream cone in your hand was greater than just an idea, but you still wouldn't have an ice cream cone, right?"

To which I said "That's right, honey"

And she said, "Well, I don't think he's thinking very good then. I think there is a God, but that's not why because it doesn't work."

The super cool thing about this is that the argument she gave is the classical philosophical argument presented to counter St. Anselm, the one taught in class, as given by other religious scholars of Anselm's time. And my seven year old daughter understood it as nearly a knee-jerk reaction.

I was so proud I laughed myself to tears.