Comparing Descartes Meditations On First Philosophy

Descartes and Hume are two very famous philosophers who had very distinct and competing beliefs about God. Descartes was a rationalist and Hume was an empiricist, therefore both had different restrictions on our ability to have knowledge on God. Rationalist claim that our knowledge is gained independently of sense experience. Empiricists claim that sense experience is the source of all our concepts and knowledge. In Descartes’ Meditations on First Philosophy, Descartes attempts to prove that there is knowledge that God exists. On his journey to doing this he examines the idea of being a thinking thing, the concept of clear and distinct ideas, cause and effect, and the fact that he is imperfect to conclude that God exists. Hume mentions in
his Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding that there is only knowledge that the idea of God exists and not the actual being. Hume’s account of the theory of ideas is that all of our thoughts and feelings are perceptions. He then divides all perceptions of the mind into two classes, impression and ideas, consequently classifying God as an idea.
By proving this, he mentions the idea of experience and how knowledge of things can only come from experience. As Descartes proves that God exists in his mediations, there are very clear flaws that arise, thus causing Hume’s idea of God’s existence to be more reliable than Descartes. Descartes first approaches the idea of the existence of God in his third meditation: Concerning God, That He Exists. He starts out with an idea he mentioned earlier in the Meditations on First Philosophy about how he is a thinking thing. “ I am a thing that thinks, that is to say, a thing that doubts, affirms, denies, understands a few things, is ignorant of many things, wills, refrains from willing, and also imagines and senses” (Descartes, 24). This is the first thing that Descartes knows to be true. He says, “What about thinking? Here I make my discovery: thought exists; it alone cannot be separated from me. I am; I exist- this is certain” (Descartes, 19). He goes on to say that his senses are deceptive and whatever he may understand from his senses may be false, therefore he cannot rely on them. He then tries to
dismiss this idea by turning to something else that he knows is true, and that is the existence of God, “but in order to remove even the basis for doubt, I should at the first opportunity inquire whether there is a God” (Descartes, 25). Descartes knows that the existence of God is true based on his theory of clear and distinct ideas, where he says, “... I now seem able to posit as a general rule that everything I very clearly and distinctly perceive is true” (Descartes, 24). A clear and distinct idea is an idea that strongly impresses itself on the mind with clarity and coherence. He believes that the idea of God is one of the very few ideas that can be so clear to him. He reiterates that he is a thinking thing and that is all he is capable of doing, therefore, he cannot perceive the elements of something which he does not posses. He states in the meditations, “I understand by the name “God” a certain substance that is infinite, independent, supremely intelligent, supremely powerful” (Descartes, 30). Descartes then comes to the conclusion that he is an imperfect being, so he could not possibly think of a being that is so clearly and distinctly perfect. In this case, something that is perfect must have put that thought into his mind, and that something must be God. Descartes later on discusses the fact that everything has a beginning and everything comes from something. This is cause and effect. Since he believes this to be true, then something must have created him, something that is more perfect than he. He also believes that ideas have causality and that the cause of it must be as true as the reality. Therefore, if he has an idea of an infinitely perfect being, then some infinitely perfect being must exist because the cause of any idea must have at least as much reality as the idea has objective reality. In meditation Five he also concludes that necessary existence belongs to the essence of God. The existence of God is necessary because something more perfect had to create something that is less perfect. Many philosophers disagreed with Descartes, Hume being one of them. Hume's views about the nature and existence of God are very complex. After reading Humes’ stance on religion and God, people living in his time believed him to be an atheist. Hume was a strong believer of the fact that humans have knowledge only of things they directly experience, “it is readily allowed, that other beings may posses many senses of which we can have no conception; because the ideas of them have never been introduced to us, in the only manner by which an idea can have access to the mind, to wit, by the actual feeling and sensation” (Hume, 12). Due to this, Hume removed God completely and argued forcefully against the possibility of his existence. “If the external would be once called in question, we shall be at a loss to find arguments, by which we may prove the existence of that Being or any of his attributes” (Hume, 105). Hume talks about two types of ideas, matters of fact and relations of ideas. Hume first argues that existence is a matter of fact. A matter of fact, he stated, are more common truths we learn through our experiences (a posteriori). He states, "The non-existence of any being, without exception, is as clear and distinct an idea as its existence" (Hume, 113). Relations of ideas are a priori and are not involved with experience, they are all logically true statements. Hume gives two examples, 5+7=12 and all bachelors are unmarried. These ideas are certain and if denied it implies a contradiction. The idea of God is not a relation of ideas because his existence is not certain. Hume believes that all knowledge came from experience, and that there is no innate knowledge in the mind. Babies are born not knowing anything until they have the chance to experience it. This means that if God were to exist he would have had to be experienced by someone. Because God has not been experienced, the actual being cannot exist. The only thing that Hume believes is that the idea of God, a perfect being that created us all, is the only thing that exists and not God himself. The way in which Hume knows that even an idea can exist is based on his account of the theory of ideas. Hume's account of the theory of ideas is that all of our thoughts and feelings are perceptions. He divides all perceptions of the mind into two classes, impressions and thoughts or ideas. Impressions are lively perceptions such as hearing, seeing, feeling, loving etc. Ideas are less lively perceptions when we reflect on these sensations. In section II of The Origin of Ideas in An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding, Hume states God is an idea "reflecting on the operations of our own mind, and augmenting, without limit, those qualities of goodness and wisdom" (Hume, 11). For example, we have come up with the love of God and his embrace because we know what love feels like from our mothers. All ideas, according to Hume, are derived from an impression. Since Descartes’ account has many flaws, Hume’s account is more widely accepted by philosophers. There are several places in Descartes’ argument where he either contradicts himself or an error can be found.
For example, why can Descartes not come up with the idea of God? The meditator believes that, “ Hence it follows that something cannot come into being out of nothing, and also that what is more perfect (that is what contains in itself more reality) cannot come into being from what is less perfect” (Descartes, 28). He is capable of understanding that he is an imperfect being, therefore, he is able to understand what a perfect being must be – which is the opposite of him. If he knows what a perfect being is then he could come up with the idea of God himself, yet he claims he is unable to put the thought of such a being in his head. Descartes also contradicts himself in Mediation Five when he says that God is perfect. Based on the definition of perfect, God would be unconditionally benevolent. This is not true because injustice is very prevalent in the world. This may mean that God might fail to hold other attributes that are perfect, thus not actually being perfect. If God is not perfect he may not exist according to Descartes because one of Descartes attributes he assigns to his concept of a perfect God is existence. The order in which Descartes proves the existence of God can cause some problems as well. Descartes assigns God with attributes before actually proving that God exists. He does this in Meditation Five. What is bad about this is that Descartes reasoning
for God's existence could fall apart. He claims that substances are only capable of holding attributes and God is a substance because he exists. However, if God does not exist then he has misplaced the attributes and assigned something attributes that does not actually exist. Descartes says that God exists without actually proving it first. These reasons mentioned are all reasons that make it hard for philosophers to believe Descartes proof of God. Though some philosophers might agree with Descartes’ proof of God, many would rather agree with Hume’s because of his lack of flaws. Descartes has some stable ideas, but he tends to prove them with some very unstable concepts. The fact that he cannot come up with the idea of God on his own does not make perfect sense. His order in which he proves God could also cause some difficulties as well. Tough philosophers may not believe that all knowledge comes form experience, Hume’s proof for the idea of God is much more stable then Descartes’. Hume takes a more rational side where he states that god does not necessarily not exist, but with the information we have now it is only safe to say there exists an idea of him. Though his thoughts may come off as atheist to some, he can be seen as appealing to both a believer and a non-believer. This is why Hume’s proof is more widely accepted.