Human existence

In philosophy, there are many different questions seeking to be answered. A scholar might look at certainty, the existence of God, whether or not an individual changes throughout time, or some other great unknown. A conflicting question that more individuals should consider would deal with their own existence, and why humans exist at all. By looking at the idea of reality, creationism, and impressions, one can fully deduce why people exist. These topics are clearly invisible in stories like Lewis

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

he must be a being worth believing in, therefore he must be a perfect and morally righteous being. God must be perfect so that he can be a model for people to follow. Descartes knows for a fact and states it in his ontological argument that God's existence is known through intuition. In the article the author states that "While such considerations

Descartes use this principle to prove the existence of God? Does his proof work? In the 3rd mediation of Descartes Mediations and other Metaphysical Writings, Descartes provided us with The Trademark Argument, a both cosmological and ontological argument, in order to attempt to prove the existence of God. The a priori (something that comes before) argument gains its title from the concept that God has left a ‘trademark’ or stamp in our minds to prove his existence. Descartes saw there to be three different

Aquinas’ Cosmological Argument is a method for proving God’s existence and its foundation is based on the fact and observation that the universe exists. Aquinas states that in order for the universe to exist (an idea that we know to be true), there must also exist a cause that caused the existence of the universe. He concludes his argument by saying that God, an unperceivable image, is the cause of the universe, which further verifies His existence. This argument proves that in order to accept the factual

facts and their existence depends upon us meaning even facts that obtained before our existence are dependent on us. In this essay my primary focus will be evaluating ‘absolute’ fact constructivism(chapter 3)and one significant claim as well as an argument for and against it in order to justify why I don’t support fact constructivism. What we call ‘absolute’ fact constructivism in essence is a constructivist theses which states that the existence of facts is dependent solely on humans- it also states

The Mystery of God's Existence The mystery of God's existence has been a crucial element of many religious studies and traditions. Who is God? What is God? Where is God? To effectively discuss the existence of God, it is necessary to illustrate the notion of faith. People of faith believe that God does exist, and that relationship with God gives meaning to their lives. Others who are skeptical point to God as an obsolete hope of an ignorant human race. People today live in a world distinguished

The Biblical cosmogony is based on the provisions of Genesis chapter one. The basis of this myth is the fact that the universe and all its constituents are creations of a supreme being, in this case called God. The myth clashes with scientific views such as evolution theories because it suggests that God created everything by word of mouth and the work of his hands. The religious creation theory is the foundation of major spiritual convictions, which include Christianity, Judaic and Islam (Blumenthal

The contributions of Descartes and Hume towards the issue of establishing: the existence of God Introduction: Arguments for and against the existence of god have been proposed by philosophers, theologians, scientists and others for thousands of years. In Philosophy, these arguments involve primarily the disciplines of Epistemology and Ontology and can be categorized as metaphysical, logical, empirical, or subjective. The epistemic arguments place different restrictions on our ability have knowledge

Anselm's ontological argument is a philosophical argument which aims to prove God's existence. The ontological argument is an argument for God’s existence based on reason alone. According to this argument, there is no need to go out looking for physical evidence of God’s existence; we can work out that he exists simply by thinking about it logically. (Anon., 2004) Anselm’s argument is a reductio argument, it seeks to demonstrate that a statement is true by showing that an absurd result would follow