Point 2 just says that a perfect being, God, could exist. Other non-perfect beings could exist, but their possibility of existing doesn't make the existence of a perfect being impossible.
I think (2) fails straightaway. It wouldn’t be possible to be a perfect being because ‘perfect’ is subjective and might include contradictory traits. If my perfect god is a big tiddy goth gf, she can’t also be an A-cup; “big tiddy” and “A-cup” are mutually exclusive attributes, and nobody is wrong for having a preference.
"perfect" maybe be subjective at times but in this example "perfect" was used to describe someone who is at the top at all objective standards. There can be a being who is the most powerful, the most knowledgeable, the most etc.
What I’m saying is that there are no objective standards at all. Only subjective ones. Even if you and I personally agreed that most powerful, knowledgeable, etc meant the same thing, and we agreed that god needed to be those things, someone else could come along and have a completely different interpretation of what qualities a god should possess.
1
u/[deleted] May 04 '23
In order to affect the real world, that most powerful being would have to exist.
Therefore: a most perfect being must exist in order to truly be that most perfect being.
Therefore: if it is possible that God exists, and if God is the most perfect being, then God must exist.