Rene Descartes Analysis

Descartes’s mission in the meditations was to doubt everything and that what remained from his doubting could be considered the truth. This lead Descartes to argue for the existence of God. For the purpose of this paper, I will first discuss Descartes’s argument for the existence of God. I will then take issue with Descartes’s argument first with his view on formal reality and varying levels of reality, then with his argument that only God can cause the idea of God. I will then conclude with

proof of his existence that cannot be doubted. Descartes has in himself the idea of God

Descartes believes that God's existence is clear and distinct. God exists because the thought of God is derived from a "completely clear and distinct" idea from within his being (which he concedes is a thinking being). Having come from distinct thoughts, the idea of God can therefore never be considered a falsity. From this very distinct idea of God comes everything else that one grasps distinctly and clearly.

Prior to his method on error, Descartes has already proven a pair of foundational beliefs. In meditation one, Descartes proved that he was “a thinking thing” and that in order to be a thinking thing, “I exist”. In mediation three, he proved that God exists due to the fact that in order to have an idea of God, one must already have the idea innately implanted in their mind. Since Descartes is finite he believes that God innately implanted the thought of an infinite perfect being in his mind, so therefore God exists.

The Meditations on First Philosophy by Rene Descartes is a thorough analysis about doubt. Descartes describes his method of doubt to determine whether he can truly know something. One of his major arguments is the proof of the existence of God. In this paper, I will attempt to unravel the flaws in Descartes proof that God exists.

The existence of God has always been an arguable topic. Descartes’ however, believed that he had proof of God’s existence through an intense analysis of the mind. Throughout this paper I will discuss what he has provided as proof and some of the complications that arise throughout his argument.

After giving his first proof for the existence of God Descartes concludes by mentioning that this proof is not always self-evident. When he is absorbed in the world of sensory illusions it is not quite obvious to him that God’s existence can be derived from the idea of God. So to further cement God’s existence Descartes begins his second proof by posing the question of whether he could exist (a thinking thing that possesses the idea of an infinite and perfect god) if God itself did not exist.

The 17th century philosopher Rene Descartes believed that God exists. His proof of an all perfect being’s existence was explained by having an idea of God that had to have been caused by God. But simply having an idea of God is not enough for there to necessarily exist such a being. This paper will critically examine Descartes’s causal argument though its premises and conclusion.

Descartes begins his argument, of the existence of God, with the only thing he knows to be true; that through doubting, he must exist. By knowing he doubts he therefore does not know everything. This makes him imperfect. However, to know that he is an imperfect being he must therefore have an idea of what is perfection. And by having that idea, because he is finite and cannot come up with such an idea himself, a perfect being must exist- God. Knowing that he has an idea of perfection, Descartes continues to prove God's existence by assuming everything must have a cause. This is known as the Principal of Sufficient Reason. Descartes views God as an innate idea, as is that of his own existence. The problem with thinking that God is an innate idea is that it does not include the ideas which others have of God. One would assume that if God were an innate idea, one that was planted in the mind, then all ideas of God would be the same. An instance where God is very different

Descartes knows he exists, so there must be a cause for his existence, and God is that cause. His third argument resembles the ontological argument, and is based on the definition of God. He theorizes that God is perfect, and nothing that is perfect does not exist. Therefore, God must exist because God not existing would be a logical contradiction. Descartes believes we have several good reasons to believe in God.

So, we know the essence of material substances innately. Descartes’ first premise is plausible because every object, whether it is a thought or physical reality, can be broken down and described by the geometrical properties of size, shape, and position. From a metaphysical standpoint, Descartes thinks his second claim is valid

This paper aims to argue why Descartes would not think that an atheist can have the same certainty about existence of material object as he, himself has. First, it will outline the definition of Descartes’ existence theory of material object. It will then outline the atheist’s theory about existence of material object. Second, it will outline why an atheist cannot have the same inevitability about existence of material objects as Descartes believe. Finally, it will conclude that Descartes believed that our knowledge does not come from the senses, instead it comes from God. Conversely, atheists reject God’s existence as they believe all that exists are material objects identified by sense.

Descartes argues that the concept of God cannot be simply subjected. His first argument about God is based on two principles. The first principle is that of “Sufficient Reason.” By this, he means that everything has a cause. The second principle is the “Principle of Adequate Reality.”

In Rene Descartes Meditations on First Philosophy, Descartes is seeking to find a system of stable, lasting and certain knowledge, which he can ultimately regard as the Truth. In his methodical quest to carry out his task, Descartes eventually arrives at the proverbial fork in the road: how to bridge the knowledge of self with that of the rest of the world. Descartes’ answer to this is to prove the existence of God. The purpose of this essay will be to state and explain Descartes' Third Meditation: Proof of God's Existence by identifying relevant concepts and terminology and their relationship to each other and examining each premise as well as the conclusion of the proof and finally

From this definite foundation Descartes tries to prove that there is something external to the mind. So he states the law of casualty. This basically says that nothing can be created from nothing, and that the less perfect can not create something more perfect or better than itself. Then if there is an idea in our minds that we didn’t create, something else created it. If God is more perfect than us, then we could not have created God but God created us. Descartes then wrote about the idea of God. He said that God is infinite and could not have been created by us because God is more perfect than us thus undoubtable and certain. The idea that God exists disproves the Evil Genius theory therefore proves the existence of an external world.