Descartes Vs. Pascal Essay

perfection, and therefore, if he were not to exist, there would have to be a higher form of

almost polar opposite of reason is showed in the numerous philosophers he references in the

The traditional God in the Judeo-Christian tradition is known to be as an “Omni-God” possessing particular divine attributes such as omniscient, which means he knows everything he is also omnipotent, or all powerful. God has also been said to be also he is omnipresence which means he exists in all places and present everywhere, however there are many philosophical arguments on whether if any of that is actually true or if there is a God at all. This paper argues that it is not possible to know whether the traditional God exists or not. While there have been philosophers such as Aquinas, Anselm, Paley and Kierkegaard who are for god and present strong argument, likewise philosopher like Nietzsche and arguments like the problem of evil both make valid point on why God isn’t real.

In general, it was a philosophical, intellectual, and cultural movement that accentuated reason and logic over dogma and superstition, which was a part of traditional medieval Christianity. 3) Passage 2, John Locke. Locke argues that reasoning is more than deductive reasoning. Rather than trusting your own ideas, he states that “Reason is natural revelation” in which things created by God are proof enough and need no certainty. Faith is considered as a communication from God.

Pascal said that we can't know certain truth, but reason is the best source of

Edmund Gettier’s argument that justified true belief is not a sufficient definition for knowledge is correct. There are many scenarios in which the conditions for justified true belief are met but cannot be said to qualify as knowledge; therefore justified true belief is not a sufficient definition for knowledge.

exists and his idea of what a perfect being is, such as God, then God exists.

Anselm’s Ontological Argument argues for the existence of an all-perfect God. The Ontological Argument assumes that Existence is a great making property. Critiques of Anselm and his version of the Ontological Argument argue that existence is not a great making property. If the critics are correct, they have completely bested Anselm, and destroyed his argument. In this essay, I will argue on behalf of Anselm’s argument and defend existence as a great making property.

Anselm believed in a perfect being theology, and support for premise one resides within Anselm's Principle of God's Necessary Perfection (Marenbon 121). A being 'that which nothing greater can be conceived' is by definition the greatest being, or most perfect being, possible. He uses the idea that 'that which nothing greater can be conceived' exists in someone's mind as a starting point, and seeks to build upon this foundation to show that God necessarily exists in reality as well. If it could not be conceived in one's understanding, then as far as this argument is concerned, it couldn't be shown to exist in reality as well.

1. Introduction In contemporary philosophy, it is generally agreed that the existence of God cannot be proven definitively. The debates regarding the existence of a God are foundationally based on logic. William James and Blaise Pascal have provided interesting arguments regarding the logical reasons one should and/or could believe in God.

In a quote previously shown, Descartes claims that his idea of a perfect being comes from God. Descartes also believes that the idea

Rene Descartes, a rationalist, said that each person contains the criteria for truth and knowledge in them. Finding truth and knowledge comes from the individual themselves, not necessarily from God. Descartes also believed that reason is the same for every single person. Descartes believed that nothing could be true unless we as humans could perceive it. He also believed that you could break down things into smaller simpler parts. Descartes also believed that there was a relationship between the mind and body. He also believed that the idea of being perfect originated from God since God himself was perfect. He also integrates his mathematical concepts into his methodology. Descartes also applied doubt to his ideas before he

I would like to explain this claim by using another example in another area of knowledge i.e. art. Take the example of Mona Lisa painting, some people find that she is actually looking at the viewer, some think that she is not looking at them, some find that she is crying in the painting and some picturize her as smiling. So all these viewers are right in their way, as we cannot blame anyone saying that no Mona Lisa is smiling or no Mona Lisa is crying or anything for that matter. This really depends on the perception, emotions and reasoning ability of the viewer. As, if the viewer, who is in a happy mood, may find her smiling and those viewers who are not in a good mood may find her crying. So it depends upon the state of mind of the person who is watching the painting at that time. In this situation reasoning is dominated by emotion.

“Now I want the readers to understand that just because someone has an explanation for something, that doesn’t make it true. The Greeks

The production of knowledge is a process that occurs through a sequence of related actions, these series of actions allows for the Ways of Knowing to interact in a way that works to develop the knowledge that is being produced. From the prescribed title we can claim that while the Ways of Knowing may appear to be acting in isolation when forming knowledge, they are actually working in a variety of different ways in the construction and formation. In some cases, the Ways of Knowing are interacting so closely together that it is often hard to differentiate between them, for example emotion and reason, or imagination and memory. Given the right circumstances faith can be isolated to a point where it can be acting by itself to produce knowledge. However, this knowledge is often deemed as unreliable, due to faith being seen as one of the more “subjective” ways of knowing. This inability to differentiate the ways of knowing from each other during the production of knowledge, raises the questions “Can any knowledge in any Area of Knowledge be produced by a single Way of Knowing?” and “Is it possible to distinguish between Ways of Knowing if they are working together?”. While reason is used in almost all production of knowledge, it is the other Ways of Knowing used that can determine whether the knowledge is reliable or not, as some Ways of Knowing are more subjective than others. This essay will attempt to