Does God Exist? A physiological and personal perspective
The idea of God and His existence has baffled the human race for a very long time. At some point God’s existence was never doubted, for His presence and existence was all around in people’s faith and miracles. As time went on, advancement of modern science has made God come into question. . Once being the all mighty Perfect Being is now the source of lots of doubt. The same Being that was once the certain One without a doubt has now become the most questionable one. God’s followers, His faithful people, have now become unsure.
Born in France, Rene Descartes, the father of modern thought and philosophy, was the first one to try to prove God’s existence. He does this by the use
…show more content…
He defined God as “that than which nothing greater can be conceived”, this “nothing greater” is more perfect and the highest object of thought. He then brings up the point of either God exists or not. He uses a scripture from the Bible from the book of Psalm 13:1. The scripture says, “The Fool has said in his heart, ‘There is no God.’”. But unlike what you would think Saint Anselm doesn’t use the scriptures to deny God. Instead he argues that God has to exist. When His concept of “nothing greater can be thought” is heard by a fool, the Fool must surely understand the concept of …show more content…
Hume is against Aquinas cosmological argument. He believes that that an explanation can be given to any creature that is found on this earth. He argues in his theory that the chain of notion must give the reason on why it came to existence. He goes on to explain that since we can’t prove why there are creatures here on earth then that must mean that it’s a result of its own cause. He also explained his theory that since humans can’t understand or see the things that are supposed to be around them then it must mean they don’t exist. ("Hume, David | Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy",
To begin with, Anselm introduces the Ontological argument as a viral component of the religious aspect of mankind. The presence of a God should not be debated. He portrays this God as an all perfect being that represents the divine concept. He argues that no being is greater than God whether imagined or perceived by the human mind. From the human perspective of divinity, God’s existence is merely an idea of the mind. Even though man’s imagination can present an even higher being than God, it fails to make sense in philosophical principles since it is contradictory. Also, the existence of God can be conceptualized. This means that the senses of man are enough to act as proof of the presence of a being higher and more powerful than him. Philosophy allows for proof to be logical and factual as well as imaginative. From this point, the objection to an idea or imagination such as the existence of God makes his
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
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
Anselm goes on to justify his assumption by using the analogy of a painter. In short, when a painter first conceives of what it is he wants to accomplish, he has it in his understanding but does not yet understand it to exist. He doesn’t understand it to exist because he has yet to construct his painting. His point in general is that there is a difference between saying that something exists in my mind and saying that I believe that something exists. Anselm goes on to introduce another assumption that could be considered a new version of the argument. He tries to show that God cannot possibly exist in the understanding alone by contrasting existing in the understand with existing in reality.
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.
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.
Rene Descartes’ third meditation from his book Meditations on First Philosophy, examines Descartes’ arguments for the existence of God. The purpose of this essay will be to explore Descartes’ reasoning and proofs of God’s existence. In the third meditation, Descartes states two arguments attempting to prove God’s existence, the Trademark argument and the traditional Cosmological argument. Although his arguments are strong and relatively truthful, they do no prove the existence of God.
The argument is presented as if he is speaking to or trying to persuade someone that believes God doesn’t exist. While it’s written in a way that isn’t as straight forward as we speak today, with some consideration, it is simple to break down what Anselm proposed:
Philosophy Paper #3 Descartes believes that God exists, and he gives three arguments for why he believes this. His first argument comes from the fact that he has an idea of what God is like. Since an idea like that couldn’t come from him, it must have come from God. His second argument is a causal argument.
Anselm says that God cannot be thought not to exist. This may be because as people grow into adulthood, they are taught that God exist, even a non-believer has considered the existence of God. God is so pure and so true that an idea of a something that created everything could not not exist. What does something so true mean? Anselm says, “So that than which a greater can not be thought exists so truly that it cannot be thought not to exist.” Anselm is referring to God in the same way that Aquinas refers to God in his fourth reason, gradation. Aquinas says, “Among beings there are some more and some less good…. therefore there must also be something which is to all beings the cause of their being, goodness, and every other perfection; and this we call God.” He refers to the gradation of things. Some of us have more
St. Anselm begins his argument by saying that God is the one that grant the ability of understanding to faith, in which an understanding insofar that has been very beneficial to him. He added that an understanding which he believes God is in fact what he believes to be. Thus, with that understanding leads to the rationale of the notion of something greater to be thought exist is an unconscionable. Anselm’s argument stresses the perspectives which to purport by presenting to those who deny the existence of God as the greatest being is self-contradictory. Therefore, the point of his argument, it is essentially crucial to realized that such a being exist. The “ontological argument by St. Anselm “is the most compelling and fascinating argument
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.
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.
In the "Proslogion," Anselm states that God is "something greater that which we can conceive of nothing." This very confusing statement, which is likely
I believe that St. Anselm’s description of the existence of God was through knowledge, and the power of thought in relation to the heart. In a way that, when you gain wisdom or knowledge about God, you will have no choice but to accept the existence of God. He also places strong value on the human thought and it’s relation to God. St. Anselm believed that knowledge would bring people to an understanding of God, and in return their thoughts would be of God. I agree with how important St. Anselm believed knowledge, thought, and the heart were in understanding God’s existence. I believe that in the past very few people were given the opportunity to research what the Bible really said, because majority of the knowledge was held by churches and