Rene Descartes's Argument Regarding The Existence Of God
Rene Descartes’s Meditations Descartes, in his third Meditation, conveys a powerful argument regarding the existence of God. The first concept that he outlines is that since every idea must be caused, and if he has an idea that he isn’t the cause of, then something other than him must exist. The next step of Descartes’s argument states that all ideas of material reality could have only originated within him, but the idea of God, a perpetual and flawless being could not have originated from Descartes since he himself isn’t perpetual and flawless like God. Furthermore, he goes on to state that the idea of God, could indeed only have spurred by God and not a human and therefore god exists. These points are the basis of Descartes’s argument that God indeed does exist.
…show more content…
The first concept that Descartes applied towards his argument that leads up to the proof that God exists is that every idea must be caused and the cause must indeed be as real as the idea, and if he has any idea of which he cannot be the cause, then something besides him exists.
Descartes then brings upon the point that extraneous forces bring upon ideas, and usually these ideas do not depend upon his will. He points to these extraneous thoughts that enable him to understand God; who is eternal, infinite, omniscient, omnipotent, and the creator of all things other than himself; and has more objective reality within it than do the finite substances which Descartes describes as things generally on Earth, especially us humans since nothing is
immortal. To build more on the first concept, Descartes separates the ideas and thoughts into different kinds, as first there are simply ideas, and then there are judgments and lastly they can be adventitious. He reasons that ideas are easily identifiable, and that he cannot be mistaken with ideas independently, but can only make mistakes and errors in regard to judgment. He tries to describe how ideas in the mind are unique and that our biggest error with judgment is that we believe that our ideas mirror things outside the mind. He then goes on to describe the sources for ideas in that they are either absorbed by us from our outside environment, formulated independently by us, or they are adventitious; which is an idea that occurs by chance rather than design. Descartes feels that since an adventitious idea isn’t formed by our independent will per say, but that it is transcended to us by an outside source. The second concept that Descartes uses to fortify his argument is that the idea of God, an infinite and perfect being could not have originated from him, or a matter of fact any others. This is because in contrast to God’s stature as an infinite and flawless being, individual humans only exist for a finite time and invariably are flawed. He is trying to depict that how could the perpetual nature of God is one of the reasons that God is flawless and our finite nature is a flaw. For example, how can an apple tree with a short lifespan blossom year after year, while an infinite apple tree could keep producing fruit forever.
Descartes says that since all ideas are a form of thought, they have equality through the medium of thought and as a result contain an identical amount of formal reality. But the area in which they vastly differ is their objective reality, which in essence is the reality of the objects that they are wholly representative of. An example that distinguishes the two can be seen in a dream, if someone is dreaming of a space elevator, than the idea has formal reality since space elevators aren’t in objective existence. But, if someone is dreaming of a motorcycle, it has objective reality because it is a thought that can represent an actual object. It can be derived that no effect can have a greater amount of reality than its cause, and as a result, everything that comes into being consequentially must be created by something that has just as much or in fact greater reality. It is also stated in Descartes’s argument that ideas can spur other ideas, but there must be something of greater substance than an idea to cause all of these events and objects. An initial idea has to have as much formal reality as there is objective reality. It is brought to attention that if an idea with a great magnitude of objective reality then there must be spawned from something that has even a greater magnitude of formal reality than Descartes and humans in general possess. This is so because ideas that he formulates that seem to be true can, be triggered by one’s inner imagination even though physically they may not exist. To now introduce the third concept of God, which states that God himself could have only initiated the idea of God when considering the elements related to god such as his perpetual nature and flawlessness. God must exist, because he is the cause of the idea of himself therefore validating his existence. The idea of God is that God necessarily must have far more objective reality than he has formal reality. What is made with the statement of God’s existence is that while Descartes can doubt the existence of other things, which is made evidently clear, the existence of God is irrefutable. The idea of God, and because of what God is as a perpetual and flawless being, the idea of God has objective reality and is the idea that is most likely to be true than any other idea. Also, infinite substances have the most reality, followed by finite substances. So if man, a finite substance is real, than God who is infinite by nature, then must have more reality and therefore exist. An infinite object has more reality because it is always there, unlike finite objects, which can come and go since they are objects only in existence for a limited amount of time therefore limiting their reality. For example, the sun is infinite during our lifetimes, which gives off light, but a light bulb, which also gives up light is only finite and therefore does not contain as much reality as the Sun. Descartes then entertains the possibility that he may be flawless, and that all of his shortcomings actually signify potential that would drive him closer to perfection. He rationalizes through this that perfection is a possibility within him. But, he refutes this possibility for a plethora of reasons. He states that as a result of his objective reality that since God is flawless and an idea and substance of truth, that God has no improvement to be done and therefore no potential to be realized. Also, he recognizes that though he may get closer to perfection, he will never achieve it. He then says that if he could exist without God, he would have to have had to come from something that is flawed. He also states that there is no reason that he should continue to exist unless there is a force, such as that of God, which preserves him and the environment around him. Descartes’s merits of the premises that he assumes are correct in some ways that he rationalizes that God exists but are ultimately flawed and God cannot exist in this way. The first part of his argument in his argument on the idea of God, Descartes talks about how we get ideas and also proceeds to classify ideas. In his argument where he says that ideas are either judgment, adventitious, or they are simply ideas. He then proceeds to say that our only flaw is with judgments, which is in the most part a mental representation created by an individual. This is true because, for example, humans make false judgments many times as a result of stereotypes, where they assume something about someone because of how they look, their race, culture or nationality. Descartes then says that the idea of God could only have originated from God himself and that he is a flawless and perpetual figure. How could God have possibly originally conveyed the idea of God upon people? Descartes uses the terms objective and formal reality and even goes as far as to say that God has infinite objective reality. Formal reality is the kind of reality that objects contain and objective reality is the reality of the objects represented by different ideas. Something that has formal reality in most cases is a kind of though itself, but things that have objective reality represent something outside of itself, and can even be representative of something in physical form. When Descartes, through his logic, also says that we cannot formulate the idea of god because we are finite and imperfect while God is perfect and perpetual. In refuting his claim, our status of being finite beings does not impede our ability to formulate thoughts and evaluate them with logic. If we can go as far as to evaluate God, we can go as far as to conceive the idea of an imperfect God ourselves. Descartes even proclaimed that our thoughts do not translate into reality, because of our limited objective reality, so if we did conceive the idea of God that does not mean that he is real. And, when evaluating God’s existence through the validity of Descartes’s argument we can evaluate his flawlessness. If God is actually flawless, then how come we have so much chaos in this world, as even people who are innocent and good sometimes suffer an incredulously horrendous fate. A cruel example is that in troubled cities around the world such as Darfur where there is rampant Civil War, there are children who are just days old that are sometimes killed due to the incessant turmoil. What have they done to deserve this fate from a flawless God? Descartes though did have reasonable arguments for why us humans are not God. If we matched the description of God, then we would be perfect and everyone would be perfect, as is not the case. But, this shows that if the status of becoming a God is unattainable by us, what validates the existence of God if his level cannot be attained. Even though something technically cannot come from nothing, our world as proven by science was created towards a painstakingly slow build-up. God could not have created a world instantaneously and Descartes’s claims though have a premise of logic do not have great formal or objective reality. In all, Descartes’s arguments were not successful. He provided a logical view of God, but not a practical view. The view of God as the ultimate creator, flawless, and perpetual cannot be validated because nothing in our world can sustain perfection. For example, envision a puzzle, if everything was perfect the puzzle would have square pieces that could easily be put together, and where every piece is equal to another. But, in reality, each piece has a different, shape, size and place to go, unlike a puzzle with identical pieces it is a struggle to put together. This in a sense represents our world where since not everyone is the same, like the square puzzle pieces, everyone is different and unique like the puzzle pieces we have in our imperfect world, and the puzzle can only be solved one way and not easily. Imperfection is perfection as demonstrated by the puzzle as the beauty of it is that an imperfect society strives to be perfect. This is where Descartes argument fails because he shows that perfection is only attainably by God, but true perfection is never truly attainable.
The first concept that Descartes applied towards his argument that leads up to the proof that God exists is that every idea must be caused and the cause must indeed be as real as the idea, and if he has any idea of which he cannot be the cause, then something besides him exists.
Descartes then brings upon the point that extraneous forces bring upon ideas, and usually these ideas do not depend upon his will. He points to these extraneous thoughts that enable him to understand God; who is eternal, infinite, omniscient, omnipotent, and the creator of all things other than himself; and has more objective reality within it than do the finite substances which Descartes describes as things generally on Earth, especially us humans since nothing is
immortal. To build more on the first concept, Descartes separates the ideas and thoughts into different kinds, as first there are simply ideas, and then there are judgments and lastly they can be adventitious. He reasons that ideas are easily identifiable, and that he cannot be mistaken with ideas independently, but can only make mistakes and errors in regard to judgment. He tries to describe how ideas in the mind are unique and that our biggest error with judgment is that we believe that our ideas mirror things outside the mind. He then goes on to describe the sources for ideas in that they are either absorbed by us from our outside environment, formulated independently by us, or they are adventitious; which is an idea that occurs by chance rather than design. Descartes feels that since an adventitious idea isn’t formed by our independent will per say, but that it is transcended to us by an outside source. The second concept that Descartes uses to fortify his argument is that the idea of God, an infinite and perfect being could not have originated from him, or a matter of fact any others. This is because in contrast to God’s stature as an infinite and flawless being, individual humans only exist for a finite time and invariably are flawed. He is trying to depict that how could the perpetual nature of God is one of the reasons that God is flawless and our finite nature is a flaw. For example, how can an apple tree with a short lifespan blossom year after year, while an infinite apple tree could keep producing fruit forever.
Descartes says that since all ideas are a form of thought, they have equality through the medium of thought and as a result contain an identical amount of formal reality. But the area in which they vastly differ is their objective reality, which in essence is the reality of the objects that they are wholly representative of. An example that distinguishes the two can be seen in a dream, if someone is dreaming of a space elevator, than the idea has formal reality since space elevators aren’t in objective existence. But, if someone is dreaming of a motorcycle, it has objective reality because it is a thought that can represent an actual object. It can be derived that no effect can have a greater amount of reality than its cause, and as a result, everything that comes into being consequentially must be created by something that has just as much or in fact greater reality. It is also stated in Descartes’s argument that ideas can spur other ideas, but there must be something of greater substance than an idea to cause all of these events and objects. An initial idea has to have as much formal reality as there is objective reality. It is brought to attention that if an idea with a great magnitude of objective reality then there must be spawned from something that has even a greater magnitude of formal reality than Descartes and humans in general possess. This is so because ideas that he formulates that seem to be true can, be triggered by one’s inner imagination even though physically they may not exist. To now introduce the third concept of God, which states that God himself could have only initiated the idea of God when considering the elements related to god such as his perpetual nature and flawlessness. God must exist, because he is the cause of the idea of himself therefore validating his existence. The idea of God is that God necessarily must have far more objective reality than he has formal reality. What is made with the statement of God’s existence is that while Descartes can doubt the existence of other things, which is made evidently clear, the existence of God is irrefutable. The idea of God, and because of what God is as a perpetual and flawless being, the idea of God has objective reality and is the idea that is most likely to be true than any other idea. Also, infinite substances have the most reality, followed by finite substances. So if man, a finite substance is real, than God who is infinite by nature, then must have more reality and therefore exist. An infinite object has more reality because it is always there, unlike finite objects, which can come and go since they are objects only in existence for a limited amount of time therefore limiting their reality. For example, the sun is infinite during our lifetimes, which gives off light, but a light bulb, which also gives up light is only finite and therefore does not contain as much reality as the Sun. Descartes then entertains the possibility that he may be flawless, and that all of his shortcomings actually signify potential that would drive him closer to perfection. He rationalizes through this that perfection is a possibility within him. But, he refutes this possibility for a plethora of reasons. He states that as a result of his objective reality that since God is flawless and an idea and substance of truth, that God has no improvement to be done and therefore no potential to be realized. Also, he recognizes that though he may get closer to perfection, he will never achieve it. He then says that if he could exist without God, he would have to have had to come from something that is flawed. He also states that there is no reason that he should continue to exist unless there is a force, such as that of God, which preserves him and the environment around him. Descartes’s merits of the premises that he assumes are correct in some ways that he rationalizes that God exists but are ultimately flawed and God cannot exist in this way. The first part of his argument in his argument on the idea of God, Descartes talks about how we get ideas and also proceeds to classify ideas. In his argument where he says that ideas are either judgment, adventitious, or they are simply ideas. He then proceeds to say that our only flaw is with judgments, which is in the most part a mental representation created by an individual. This is true because, for example, humans make false judgments many times as a result of stereotypes, where they assume something about someone because of how they look, their race, culture or nationality. Descartes then says that the idea of God could only have originated from God himself and that he is a flawless and perpetual figure. How could God have possibly originally conveyed the idea of God upon people? Descartes uses the terms objective and formal reality and even goes as far as to say that God has infinite objective reality. Formal reality is the kind of reality that objects contain and objective reality is the reality of the objects represented by different ideas. Something that has formal reality in most cases is a kind of though itself, but things that have objective reality represent something outside of itself, and can even be representative of something in physical form. When Descartes, through his logic, also says that we cannot formulate the idea of god because we are finite and imperfect while God is perfect and perpetual. In refuting his claim, our status of being finite beings does not impede our ability to formulate thoughts and evaluate them with logic. If we can go as far as to evaluate God, we can go as far as to conceive the idea of an imperfect God ourselves. Descartes even proclaimed that our thoughts do not translate into reality, because of our limited objective reality, so if we did conceive the idea of God that does not mean that he is real. And, when evaluating God’s existence through the validity of Descartes’s argument we can evaluate his flawlessness. If God is actually flawless, then how come we have so much chaos in this world, as even people who are innocent and good sometimes suffer an incredulously horrendous fate. A cruel example is that in troubled cities around the world such as Darfur where there is rampant Civil War, there are children who are just days old that are sometimes killed due to the incessant turmoil. What have they done to deserve this fate from a flawless God? Descartes though did have reasonable arguments for why us humans are not God. If we matched the description of God, then we would be perfect and everyone would be perfect, as is not the case. But, this shows that if the status of becoming a God is unattainable by us, what validates the existence of God if his level cannot be attained. Even though something technically cannot come from nothing, our world as proven by science was created towards a painstakingly slow build-up. God could not have created a world instantaneously and Descartes’s claims though have a premise of logic do not have great formal or objective reality. In all, Descartes’s arguments were not successful. He provided a logical view of God, but not a practical view. The view of God as the ultimate creator, flawless, and perpetual cannot be validated because nothing in our world can sustain perfection. For example, envision a puzzle, if everything was perfect the puzzle would have square pieces that could easily be put together, and where every piece is equal to another. But, in reality, each piece has a different, shape, size and place to go, unlike a puzzle with identical pieces it is a struggle to put together. This in a sense represents our world where since not everyone is the same, like the square puzzle pieces, everyone is different and unique like the puzzle pieces we have in our imperfect world, and the puzzle can only be solved one way and not easily. Imperfection is perfection as demonstrated by the puzzle as the beauty of it is that an imperfect society strives to be perfect. This is where Descartes argument fails because he shows that perfection is only attainably by God, but true perfection is never truly attainable.