Descartes later reformulated the ontological argument, who sought to prove the existence of God through reason alone. He stated that he exists, and in his mind he has the concept of a perfect being, and as an imperfect being, he could not have conjured up the idea of a perfect being, therefore this idea must have originated from the perfect being itself, and this perfect being must exist in order to be perfect, consequently a perfect being exists. He also stated that the idea of God is the idea of a perfect being, and a supremely perfect being has all perfections, existence is perfection, a supremely perfect being must have existence, therefore it is impossible to think of God as not existing, hence God exists.…
Descarte would also agree with the statement, as in his ontological argument he sets out that God is a perfect being, a part of being perfect is existing, and therefore God must exist. Descarte also uses the idea of the triangle in his argument, he writes that even if we think of triangles having four sides, the truth will not change; the triangle will remain to have 3 sides. For Descarte the triangle is God, he believes that God is immutable and will not change even if humans think he does not exist. Descarte would argue…
Descartes thinks that since we all have an innate idea of a perfect being, then that perfect being, which he calls God, has to exist, or else it would not be perfect anymore. There are two problems with this line of thought. First, do we really have an innate idea of a perfect being? Wouldn’t we need to acquire the concept of “perfect” and “being” first? It is true that we could not have directly seen or experienced a perfect being in real life, but that does not mean the idea of a perfect being has to be innate. Rather, we can form this idea merely by experiencing non-perfect beings and imagining the opposite, just like how we develop the idea of immaterial things after we have seen or experienced material things. Therefore, the idea of a perfect being is not innate, and in fact, it is possible for us never to have that idea at all. On the other hand, why must a perfect being exist? Why should existence be better, “more perfect,” than non-existence? Descartes does not give us enough evidence of the “perfectness” of existence, and thus existence cannot be guaranteed as an essential part of the perfect being’s property. Now I have shown that Descartes’ main argument for God’s existence is flawed, although I still do not rule out the possibility of God’s…
The fact that Descartes is even considering the mere question of his own existence just proves that he indeed exists and that is certain. Further, he argues that we are essentially thinking things (res cogitans) that can know our minds clearly and distinctly. Descartes pitches a tent for himself firmly in the rationalist camp, as opposed to the empiricist camp. He constantly emphasizes that the clear and distinct perceptions of the intellect are the only sure means of securing knowledge, and ultimately concludes that the senses are not designed to give us knowledge at all, but are rather meant to help us move through the world in a very practical…
Descartes casts everything into doubt in the first meditation, including God Himself. He then comes to this disproval of this theory therefore concluding that God exists. This is brought about through the causal argument.…
Rene Descartes in his Discourse of the Method begins with the problem of showing and proving his own existence, but later in the reading changes the problem and it is concentrating on proving the existence of God. The first time that I thought to myself that this reading is probably about something else than proving his own existence was where the author started talking about perfection. The author defined God as “something that truly was more perfect than I was, something indeed having perfections of which I could have any idea” (Descartes, 2010, p.16).…
Descartes conclusion on premise 6 about God’s existence argues that the clear and distinct perceptions provide the foundation or basis for the truth of our beliefs and that is so because God, who is not a deceiver would not allow Descartes to be mistaken about that which he clearlyl and distinctly perceives. His notion of clear and distinct perceptions and their truth requires God’s existence.…
In this sense, God is perfect, and would never allow deception and error to take place because they are imperfect and God consists only of perfect qualities. God would not allow one to be deceived because he is supremely good, therefore deception and error must be a result of another source. He says that if his origin is from something other than God, he could have easily created him so that he makes mistakes and until he finds his origin doubt is going to occue. Descartes supposes that God is just a tale so he says let us just fraction him out of the equation entirely. Descartes decides that he is just going to doubt everything based on two principles. The first being that everything should be doubted at some point by those who seek the truth and the second being that things that are considered doubtful should be treated as if they are false. With that in mind he concludes that he does exist even against all doubts because the Evil Genius can never say that Descartes is non-existent because he thinks he is something therefore he must be. I think, therefore I…
Descartes famously wrote his version of the ontological argument in the ‘Meditations’ in which he argued that God is an infinite being, perfect. For God to remain perfect he must then retain existence. He used the illustration of a triangle with three angles which all add up to 180 degrees. This quality of the triangle allows the triangle to be perfect and to be defined as a triangle. If the angles were taken away from the triangle it would no longer be a triangle. This is similar as to God; he could not be God if he did not exist. This proves according to Descartes that God’s existence is necessary.…
When Descartes decided to tear down his beliefs and start fresh, he needed a foundation upon which to build his ideology. When judging what reality is, God must be considered. He/she must be taken out of a religious concept and proven to exist, exist in a way in which we cannot be deceived into only thinking is real. The proof of the existence of God in this way forms the backbone of Descartes’ further forays into proving what is reality.…
Let's dive deep into these arguments, throughout this semester, I have come across various rational arguments that aim to prove the existence of God. These arguments take different philosophical approaches, all attempting to demonstrate the presence of a divine being through different lines of reasoning. These arguments are closely tied to what Anselm referred to as "perfect being theology." According to this concept, God is the most perfect being imaginable, possessing all perfections to the utmost extent. Now, let's delve into each of these arguments and examine how they connect to perfect being theology, as well as assess their strengths and weaknesses.…
Firstly, Descartes in the third meditation sets out to prove that God does indeed exist. To begin with, he considered that the source of an idea must be as real as the idea itself. He thought that since his idea of God had overwhelmingly unlimited content, then the one who caused the idea must be infinite and that it must be god, and thus asserted that what is more perfect cannot arise from what is imperfect. In his conclusion, Descartes says that God is a substance that is omnipotent, omniscient, independent and infinite. He argued that if the objective reality of an idea could not come from him, then it could have come from something else. The basis for the arguments he put forward lies in the…
By establishing the existence of God, Descartes enables himself to argue that any idea that is clear and distinct to us is innate and completely trustworthy (36). It seems that Descartes’ argument for the existence of God is a replica of his argument for his own existence: I have an idea of myself; therefore, I exist; and, I have an idea of God; therefore, God exists. One might wish to resist the argument because, as Nagel points out, the way that Descartes goes about arguing, starting from the idea of God to the existence of God, implies that the idea of perfection cannot be caused by a less-than-perfect source (36). This is what is known as the causal principle, and as Nagel mentions, it is an appeal that many readers do not find completely convincing…
Micaela Ceraso PHIL 101 Professor Papa December 9th 2014 Topic 3: The Certainty that God Is After reading the two paragraphs written by scholars I have come to three different conclusions. The author of the first argument claims that God does in fact exist and he is also infinite. The author of the second argument claims that humans are not capable of comprehending the idea of infinite, therefore we cannot argue that God is infinite or that he exists at all. Finally, Descartes claims that by The Method of Doubt, God is the one idea that cannot be doubted. Therefore, the disputed question in these three arguments is the existence of God and the idea of infinite.…
He simply states that the idea in his mind must be true because of his rule on adequate reality. It seems like Descartes proved that God exists through the understanding of himself existing. It doesn’t make sense to only compare your own existence to the existence of God. He doesn’t have too many other arguments on how or why God might exist. I think I might have agreed with his argument if he added more detail and clarity to his reasoning’s.…