I was looking over the readings as I was studying for the exam and I reread the part about Anslem's reductio argument. The argument assumes that the opponent's view is true (for argument's sake), then shows the view to be false. A false conclusion must be false, making the opposite view true. It is interesting that I read about this type of argument because it makes me realize how many times people have tried to use this technique on me without me even noticing. I suppose though it is nice to have a name and a complete explanation so in the future I will recognize when someone is trying to prove me wrong right from the start.