in 'none greater' and compare the two ways of doing this, to see clearly the distinction between atheism and positivism as alternatives to theism, to generalize the problem of contingency with respect to alternative criteria for the division between necessary and contingent propositions and to relate these to various language systems and their rules. We are, in short, in a position to inquire in this area, rather than merely to debate. So, on the whole, we may after all be at least mildly grateful to those whom we have been viewing with such severity. And certainly we should be grateful to Anselm. He did for us not exactly what he hoped to do, but in some ways far more than he could have dreamt of doing.
Gilbert Ryle tells us that the Argument rests upon the use of a 'systematically misleading expression'. In 'x exists', existence is only a 'bogus predicate' and that of which it is asserted only a 'bogus subject'. And "if existence is not a quality it is not the sort of thing that can be entailed by a quality."9 Another author says that the verb to exist "takes us right out of the purely conceptual world," and therefore "there can never be any logical contradiction in denying that God exists."10
In these charges I find unwitting instances of the 'bad____________________