Dear Minimak,
Thank you for sharing with us this delicious modified "Argument from Perfection" or "Ontological Argument"
I think that there are multiple problems with this argument. Here are the ones I just caught in few seconds. My mind is now very busy with multiple tasks and projects; thus, the following ideas are not as focused and organized as I expect from myself. But it might be a good start and spark some ideas in your mind:
I find the number 8 and 9 are problematic. Do we really have the concept of Perfection and is it really a simple concept?
Whether we have an absolute and universal concept of Perfection is questionable... We have words that are in fact place-holders for "I do not know" These words could be "mystery" or "soul" or "ghosts" or "UFO" or "god" or "infinite" depending on the context or the set of the unknown questions.
So, when we say "perfect" we mean "perhaps a better thing than the ones I have already experienced and even better than that I can imagine now." Besides, what is perfect? Perfection might be limited to the purpose of things or used to describe things within the context of Aristotle's four causes. Perfect what? Perfect pen? Perfect shoes? Perfect house? Perfect child? Perfect artist? Perfect circle? Thus, the concept of perfect may not be that "simple" It needs qualification or qualifiers. So, when we say perfect circle, we mean that all the points on the circumference must have exactly the same distance from the center of the circle.
Let's talk or more accurately, write about a "perfect pen", which is perfectly okay. For a pen (or pens) to be perfect, it does not need to be super-perfect, since we do not expect a pen to be Omniscient or Omnipresent, Unique, etc. Whatever we mean by the word pen, be it through stipulative or lexical definition, it will have limited and conventional intensions.
MATERIAL: Nu rusting, no wearing, optimum softness to accommodate the flesh of finger yet not bend while writing.
FORMAL: Ergonomic, fitting to the fingers.
EFFICIENT: Made by a "perfect company or group", not by slaves, child laborers, polluters, or a company that supports religious terrorists or racist, imperialist governments.
FINAL: Write very smoothly, visibly, on every surface, in adjustable thickness and colors.
Of course, even the perfect pen in my imagination, will not be the same perfect pen in your imagination. Furthermore, what I consider perfect today, may not be perfect tomorrow. For instance, I or someone else might consider another attribute fitting to the concept of perfection or pen and might think that a perfect pen must also speak, take the blood pressure, check the cholesterol, etc.
As you might see, I might expect from my perfect pen to do everything I want, including acting like the stick in Cinderella's godmother turning a pumpkin into a Ferrari, well a perfect Ferrari. Better, the pen itself must transform into the car and produce another perfect pen? So, starting from pen, evolving to a better, an even better pen, finally I will end up with a god-pen, or simply God, that do anything I want or anything I consider possible.
The "Argument from Perfection" that you shared with us, reverses the DIRECTION of the concept of PERFECTION, since the concept (perfection) is NOT the SOURCE, but the PRODUCT. In other words, we are not born with the concept of perfect chair, perfect pen, perfect vehicle, perfect house, perfect friend, and even perfect circle and "perfect everything". We gain those concepts through our experience; surprisingly they are subjective and continually or continuously evolving concepts.
If merely having a "simple concept" requires its ontological existence, then we have the concept of "nothingness" Thus, there must be Nothing! A big, real NOTHING! Have you received a revelation from Nothing? What does Nothing look like? What does Nothing do? Have you recently asked help from Nothing?
