Anselm, Guanilo

In Anselm's Reply to Guanilo, there is a particular section which I think requires special attention. It is the following

...But I say with certainty that if it can be so much as thought to exist, it must necessarily exist. For that which a greater cannot be thought cannot be thought of as beginning to exist.  By contrast, whatever can be thought to exist but does not in fact exist, can be thought of as beginning to exist.  Therefore, it is not the case that that than which a greater cannot be thought can be thought to exist, but does not in fact exist.  If, therefore, it can be thought to exist, it does necessarily exist.

Anselm obviously thinks there is some sense in which an object conceived exists.  Perhaps I'm a bit confused, but he seems to be saying there is a sense in which our thoughts exists, in some sort of way.  As thoughts of a thing exists, necessarily that thing exists within the thought.  That must be the only way in which he thinks that things come into existence through thought.  When he says "whatever can be thought to exist but does not in face exist, can be thought of as beginning to exist," I do not hold him to an idea such as us having a divine creative power.

It is clear Anselm doesn't think we are "Creators" in that sense.  Rather, Anselm is saying more about the power of thinking, I believe, than about the creative power of man.  Thoughts must exist, perhaps not tangibly, but in some sort of objective, spatial-temporal sense.  That is the only way is that the talk he is using can work. So if one should stand on a rooftop and shout loudly and with full conception "UNICORNS EXIST!", then they do, in some sense.  They exist as a thought conceived in the mind, a thought which can not be unthought, and in that sense, they exist.

Anselm is quite the conundrum, but he is altogether non-committal. He doesn't explicitly say we can create with out mind.  He never tries to say we can think things into existence.  But he implies that very thing.  But what is the nature of that existence?  I don't see any way it could be more than simply a conceived thought. That which is thought, exists necessarily in some way, but not necessarily tangibly.  If this is not what he's thinking, it's pretty clear he is wrong.  As it is, it's not really clear if he's wrong or not- in fact, it's not really clear what he's trying to do at all.