1) Have nihilists disregarded the question because of its presupposition of qualitative hierarchy?
2) It seems that at some point, one must acknowledge an understanding of "that thing than which no thing can be greater." But the conclusion is that "that than which..." is in reality, and therefore greater than the thing merely in the understanding. But doesn't this conclusion mean that your understanding of that which is greater was false to begin with?
3) What has been the response from poststructuralism? One would think poststructuralists would deny that Anselm's premises have no real ontological foundation. For instance, the idea that one could define and conceptualize God as "that than which no greater can exist" seems ridiculous from the perspective of posstructuralism.