Debate Challenge

[Edwardo Piet]

Congratulations, though. At least you have identified one serious objection to Aquinas, shared by Aristotle, Hume, Kant, Frege and Russell. The idea, as I understand it is that 'existence' is not a property in itself. Now, would you care to present that argument yourself or are you content to make an argument from authority?

Existence indeed is not a property in itself. Existence and essence are separate. "What is  it?" And "Does whatever it "is" actually exist?" are separate questions entirely.

This is just one reason why the ontological argument fails too. 

For those who don't know the ontological argument goes "Imagine the most perfect being imaginable, such a being would be even more perfect if it also existed, therefore a truly perfect being is existent, therefore a truly perfect beings exists."

It's ridiculous because existence is not a property.