Ontology before Analysis

I'm not sure why so many of us are chaffing at the use of the Ontological Argument. I do enjoy the discussions though.

I think that one of the critical questions that came up on Tues. was, "Why would an analysis be undertaken unless the existence of the referent of the concept were assumed?"

By the very fact that we're trying to analyze "the greatest conceivable being", we must have some idea in our mind as to what that characteristics (or essence as you say) of that being are.

Therefore the concept of a greatest conceivable being exists. One of the essential characteristics of the greatest conceivable being is its necessary existence (if it were contingent it surely wouldn't be the greatest).

Therefore the referent greatest conceivable being must exist.

Now where you can strike at this argument is that while it defends the existence of a "supreme being" it definitely doesn't get you directly to the God of Christianity. (Is that where you were going with your initial question, David?) Maybe my "greatest conceivable being" is Allah...

But hey, baby steps.

Ian