Rene Descartes Deceptive God Argument

One may first look at the argument contained within Descartes’ book Meditations on First Philosophy. In the sixth meditation Descartes states “On the one hand I have a clear and distinct idea of myself, in so far as I am simply a thinking, non-extended thing and on the other hand I have a distinct idea of body, in so far as this is simply an extended, non-thinking thing. And accordingly, it is certain that I am really distinct from my body, and can

To expand on his first argument, Descartes' deceiving God argument states that our deceptions are caused by an all powerful God. Humans are capable of being deceived because we are imperfect, unlike God, who is essential flawless. If we can agree on the definition of God, an all powerful and omnipotent being who created us, then we can argue that he has the power to deceive even our most reliable senses. Descartes expresses his compounding doubts as "How do I know that he did not bring it about that there is no earth at all, no heavens, no extended thing, no shape, no size, no place, and yet bringing it about that all these things appear to me to exist precisely as they do now?" (Descartes 491). This excerpt

From the beginning of the third meditation, Descartes seeks to establish the existence of God

In the Meditations, Rene Descartes attempts to doubt everything that is possible to doubt. His uncertainty of things that existence ranges from God to himself. Then he goes on to start proving that things do exist by first proving that he exists. After he establishes himself he can go on to establish everything else in the world. Next he goes to prove that the mind is separate then the body. In order to do this he must first prove he has a mind, and then prove that bodily things exist. I do agree with Descartes that the mind is separate from the body. These are the arguments that I agree with Descartes.

Descartes arguments in his First and Second Meditations (the universal doubt argument, the dream argument and the evil demon argument) all succeed. In his universal doubt argument Descartes was able to prove that our senses deceive us. He doubted all the beliefs that come to from the senses. Descartes was able to prove that nothing exists and that it is impossible for us to know if anything exists. Later in his Second Meditation Descartes proves that we can only know that we exist because we think. In order to further gain knowledge to doubt Descartes presented his dream argument and the evil demon argument. Both arguments continued to prove that our sense experience never puts us in contact with the objects themselves. It only puts us with

As with almost all of Descartes inquiries the roots of his second argument for the existence of God begin with his desire to build a foundation of knowledge that he can clearly and distinctly perceive. At the beginning of the third meditation Descartes once again recollects the things that he knows with certainty. The problem arises when he attempts to clearly and distinctly understand truths of arithmetic and geometry. Descartes has enough evidence to believe these things, but one major doubt is still present; the possibility of God being a deceiver. Descartes worry is that all the knowledge that he possesses through intuition could potentially be false if God merely chooses to deceive him. So in order to have a clear and distinct perception of arithmetic truths (and other such intuitive truths) Descartes delves into the question of God’s existence (and whether this God could be a deceiver or not).

In this paper, I offer a reconstruction of Descartes argument for God’s existence in the Third Meditation. Descartes tries to prove the existence of God with an argument that proceeds from the clear and distinct idea of an infinite being to the existence of himself. He believes that his clear and distinct idea of an infinite being with infinite “objective reality” leads to the occurrence of the “Special Causal Principle”. I will start by discussing and analyzing Descartes clear and distinct idea of an infinite being and how it the classification of ideas and the difference between formal and objective reality Special Causal Principle. Finally, I will examine the reasons Descartes offers for his belief in Gods existence and I will indicate the drawbacks within the proof. It will be concluded that Descartes arguments are inadequate and don’t clearly prove the existence of God.

Something very essential to know about Descartes is his idea of Cogito Ergo Sum; I think, therefore I am. He believes that he exists because he is thinking, making him a thinking thing. Descartes first premise states, "I have a clear and distinct idea of myself, in so far as I am simply a thinking, non-extended thing" (Descartes, 54). The first thing that we need to understand from this premise is what Descartes means by extended; to occupy space. So, since he believes that he is not an extended thing, it follows that he does not take up space. Given this, he looked inside himself and saw no parts within his mind, no space or boundaries that his mind contains. In addition, the mind provides a place for free will and faith, which are not parts but different ways of thinking. He rationalizes this by making the mind of a qualitative substance. By saying that only things that can be measured must be of a material substance and those things that cannot be measured are of a thought like substance. The relation between body and mind now seem to be more divided since he believes that his mind is not extended. In short, this premise states that the mind has no parts, making it indivisible.

However, the Meditator realizes that he is often convinced when he is dreaming that he is sensing real objects. He feels certain that he is awake and sitting by the fire, but reflects that often he has dreamed this very sort of thing and been thoroughly convinced by it. On further reflection, he realizes that even simple things can be doubted. Omnipotent God could make even our conception of mathematics false. One might argue that God is supremely good and would not lead Descartes to believe falsely all these things. He supposes that not God, but some "evil demon" has committed itself to deceiving him so that everything he thinks he knows is false. By doubting everything, he can at least be sure not to be misled into falsehood by this demon.

In Descartes’ Meditations, he makes the strong claim that God must exist. I will first explain what Descartes’s argument for God’s existence is, and then I will attempt to support the argument that God does not need to necessarily exist through objections and replies.

A standout amongst the most questionable, disputable topics has been the presence of god. There are various regular arguments for the presence of God. Descartes is one of many, he trusted in himself that he had affirmation of God's quality through an extraordinary examination of the mind. Descartes has more than one of many thoughts. To start Descartes ask "how would I know that I exist? As covered in my presentation Descartes wants to demonstrate that there is no evil spirit that is always deceiving him. Remembering the true objective to do this; he leaves to show that he has the unmistakable and a particular thought that God is incredible and can't along these lines mislead him. This is done by recommending the considerations can have more prominent reality. For Descartes Existence is conventional and those things that exist are more flawless or all the more awesome then those things that don't. Descartes suggests that there are three sorts of thoughts: Innate, Invented, and Adventitious. Innate thoughts are and have reliably been inside us, Fictitious or imagined contemplations begin from our imaginative energy , and Adventitious considerations start from experiences of the world. He contends that the possibility of God is Innate and set in us by God and he dismissed the likelihood that the possibility of God is Invented or Adventitious.

One of the questions that needs to be raised when discussing Descartes’ first meditation and his skeptical arguments is; is it possible to completely separate one’s self from all their current beliefs? For this is what Descartes sets out to do in the first meditation. This question is highly relevant in terms of Descartes evil demon argument, for it appears no matter what, he is not able to separate himself from his belief in God. Descartes’ argument is not that the evil demon is replacing God, which would seem to be the logical view. Instead, Descartes says that the evil demon is coexisting with God. Therefore, even though Descartes claims to be starting at ground zero and proceeding to prove that his common beliefs are true, he never actually denies the existence of God. In the later meditations, he reveals his belief in innate ideas and the existence of God is one of them. Yet as far as Descartes evil demon argument is concerned, the fact that he maintains this belief in God throughout

Descartes then presented the deceiving God argument in the means of explaining that there is a reason to doubt any knowledge achieved through reasoning, including geometrical and mathematical properties. In the deceiving God argument Descartes noted that we believe that an in all powerful God created us. He also gave us senses that can deceive us. Thus, it is possible that we are deceived even of our mathematical and geometrical knowledge. He then replied to the objection that “God is all Good” by stating that if this is the case, then God would not give us deceiving senses. To the objection that “there is no God” he replied that if this is the case, then the one who created us would be less perfect than us, and we would have more reasons to

Since Descartes was able to think, he knew that he existed ultimately. With this in mind, Descartes reckoned that a person 's "self" illustrates their identity. Descartes states: “that he possesses a body intimately conjoined... and that he has a clear and distinct idea of himself, inasmuch...it is certain that this I [that is to say, my soul by which I am what I am], is entirely and absolutely distinct from my body, and can exist without it" (Descartes, Meditations On First Philosophy, pg.29). In fact, Descartes proposes that the body connects dually with the mind, which he believes the body is "divisible", and the mind as "indivisible", but he also informs the readers that he knows certainly who he is. Not only did Descartes deem this information as true, but he was adamant about the possibility of living without a soul. In particular, Descartes depicts a vivid picture of how the

The argument in Descartes second meditation is that he wants to prove to the reader that the human mind is better known than the human body. In this meditation Descartes is looking for basic belief which has to provide some foundation for knowledge. The meditator is going to do this through a series of Sceptical doubts. First he will doubt his sense-perception because the evidence received from the outer-senses can be contradictory. This means that he will call all his sense into doubt as if he had no senses at all. Descartes will also doubt the physical world by believing that we might be dreaming. Descartes finally begins to doubt reality and the existence of God. However, he also believes that there is a presence of a type of God or evil deceiver.