> I think that is a very weak conclusion ... That's kind of my point. It's not some knock-down argument, but it's a very nuanced result that achieved a few ver

> I think that is a very weak conclusion ... That's kind of my point. It's not some knock-down argument, but it's a very nuanced result that achieved a few very neat things: 1) Formalized Anselm's "greatest of which can be conceived of" notion. 2) The concept of "accidental" (contingent) and "non-accidental" (necessary) properties had existed since antiquity, but modal logic essentially formalized the idea. 3) Showed that Anselm's argument was indeed valid. Again, this project took around 1000 years. Plantinga did a lot of work in trying to make the premises more palatable, but of course, the argument for the existence of God still rages on. (As I'm sure it will far after we're gone.)