Explain, compare, and contrast the views of anselm and gaunilo regarding the ontological argument.

Anselm argued that an ideal being is important to exist. during this argument God is an excellent being thus he should exist that is understood because of the ontological argument. Guanilo thought this argument was absurd and he viewed the other. one thing doesn't exist simply because it's excellent and he used the instance of an ideal island. The island is ideal thus in step with Anselm's view it ought to exist however the island stop to exist thus Guanilo planned this argument to be reductio ad absurdum. as compared they each agree that as a result, of one thing is ideal it doesn't exist however in distinction saint believed that God was an exception to the present because God is a whole totally different matter and Gaunilo doesn't believe God is an exception to the present view, though he Guanilo believes in God he doesn't consider the ontological argument as proof of Gods existence.

the 2nd option is the answer

ever since wwii tmthey always did hated each other.