I don't think that He (you?) argued successfully why doing something good for the wrong reasons is insufficient. When it comes to justice, objectivity is important and we can only penetrate someone's intentions based on how they act - if their acts are good, their intentions have to be assumed likewise.
The kind of moral judgement you're talking about is indeed next to impossible from an objective (human) standpoint, but knowledge of our own intentions is at least open to introspection, and more importantly God who sees into our secret hearts. Remember that this dialogue is a preamble to the later one On the Fall of the Devil, which is primarily concerned with how we make moral decisions, and therefore of merit and demerit. Since we can't know each other's intentions, we're told not to judge, but we can judge ourselves because we know ourselves, and God can judge us because He knows us. I hope it doesn't sound like I'm trying to dodge the question, because I do think that Anselm's point here is probably not as well-defended as it could be, but I think the reason for that is that he's aiming towards a specific point with it.
Frankly, I think that God will judge us the same way that humans judge each other, meaning using objective knowledge alone. It seems kind of poetic that this is how the final judgment takes place. And you're right that internally, it seems insufficient to simply accidentally act the right way, but Anselm's argument is not entirely conclusive.
![Rick Roderick on Marcuse - One-Dimensional Man [full length]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/WNAKr1TQ0xc/mqdefault.jpg)
I don't think that He (you?) argued successfully why doing something good for the wrong reasons is insufficient. When it comes to justice, objectivity is important and we can only penetrate someone's intentions based on how they act - if their acts are good, their intentions have to be assumed likewise.
The kind of moral judgement you're talking about is indeed next to impossible from an objective (human) standpoint, but knowledge of our own intentions is at least open to introspection, and more importantly God who sees into our secret hearts. Remember that this dialogue is a preamble to the later one On the Fall of the Devil, which is primarily concerned with how we make moral decisions, and therefore of merit and demerit. Since we can't know each other's intentions, we're told not to judge, but we can judge ourselves because we know ourselves, and God can judge us because He knows us.
I hope it doesn't sound like I'm trying to dodge the question, because I do think that Anselm's point here is probably not as well-defended as it could be, but I think the reason for that is that he's aiming towards a specific point with it.
Frankly, I think that God will judge us the same way that humans judge each other, meaning using objective knowledge alone. It seems kind of poetic that this is how the final judgment takes place.
And you're right that internally, it seems insufficient to simply accidentally act the right way, but Anselm's argument is not entirely conclusive.