Choose either Anselm?s version of the Ontological Argument for the existence of God, or the version of t

Choose either Anselm’s version of the Ontological Argument for the existence of God, or the version of the Cosmological Argument for the existence of God formulated by Samuel Clarke and articulated by David Hume (see the indented, italicized paragraph at the top of p. 23 in the assigned Clack & Clack text). Note: While Clack & Clack use Hume's articulation of this argument, it's important to keep in mind that Hume himself rejected the validity of this argument. I just don't want you to think of Hume as someone who accepted natural theological arguments — he himself was a radical skeptic and agnostic.

First provide a brief exposition of the essential elements of the argument you chose. As much as possible, try to put it in your own words. Focus in on the structure of these arguments, and remember that a successful argument must have two features: Its premises must TRUE, and the structure of the argument must be logically valid (which means that the conclusion necessarily follows from the premises, if indeed they turn out to be true).  Critically evaluate the argument: In your view, does it succeed? If not, where exactly do you see the argument failing? Are there parts or aspects of the argument that you find compelling, even if you disagree with the conclusion?