  A simplified variant of G\"odel's ontological argument is presented. The
simplified argument is valid already in basic modal logics K or KT, it does not
suffer from modal collapse, and it avoids the rather complex predicates of
essence (Ess.) and necessary existence (NE) as used by G\"odel. The variant
presented has been obtained as a side result of a series of theory
simplification experiments conducted in interaction with a modern proof
assistant system. The starting point for these experiments was the computer
encoding of G\"odel's argument, and then automated reasoning techniques were
systematically applied to arrive at the simplified variant presented. The
presented work thus exemplifies a fruitful human-computer interaction in
computational metaphysics. Whether the presented result increases or decreases
the attractiveness and persuasiveness of the ontological argument is a question
I would like to pass on to philosophy and theology.
