and concrete or particular, thought and reality. Obviously he is dealing in his own way with the abstract-concrete paradox, but is he making a clear advance toward its resolution? Or is he showing a muddled awareness of problems which are left for someone else to subject to lucid analysis?
Because it is arguable that Hegel's greatest influence has been through the Marxists, it is worth noting that his acceptance of the Gaunilo legend was in a sense echoed in that main source of Marxist atheism, Feuerbach Essence of Christianity. There, after quoting the Latin of Anselm's definition of divine Greatness, the author tells us that the Proof runs: nonexistence is a defect ( Nichtsein ist ein Mangel), therefore. . . .36 This of course is Prosl. II, for the hundredth time posing as the heart of the matter. One need add only two syllables to get an approximation to the proper form of the major premise: Nichtseinkönnen ist ein Mangel, the possibility of nonexistence is a defect. But to be wise enough to make and understand this addition, one might perhaps need to read what Anselm wrote on the subject. And this, it seems, one does not do, no matter to what school of philosophy one belongs.
Notable also is Feuerbach's assumption that the real existence of God, or of anything else, must be 'particular' or 'empirical'. Much of Feuerbach's brilliant attack upon theism reads like a diffuse exploitation of the abstract-concrete or Findlay paradox, that God both must and must not be an____________________