You Point, I figure it out...

Since English is not my first language, I decided to create this blog in order to get my friends' comments and views on my academic essays, because this will, I believe, help me improve both my writing style and my argumentative skills. You do not have to write a long comment or feedback. You can refer to a weak point in my essay, and I will try to figure it out. I know your time is precious but nothing more joyful than intellectual interaction because it enables us to discover the unknown in ourselves and in the world accordingly. Remember that this world was only an idea in someone's mind which indicates the power that ideas could have! So, help my ideas be good in order for them to survive!

Friday, January 1, 2010

Descartes and the Existence of God in Human Mind



November 22th, 2009

Descartes and the Existence of God in Human Mind


Descartes had more than one version to prove the existence of God. In all of his versions, he discovered the existence of God while he was in the destructive stage where he doubted all his past beliefs especially those, which were resulted from sensory knowledge and demonstrative reasoning. Descartes’ ontological argument is crucial in understanding his philosophical method, because on the existence of God Descartes sets the foundation of the criterion of true and false, and all human knowledge. In the Discourse of Method, Descartes discovers the existence of God in his own mind. When Descartes conceives his own imperfection, he assumes that there is a more perfect being than he is. He comes to discover that God is the perfect being behind his idea of perfection. As a result, he declares the existence of God. I find some of Descartes’ arguments for the existence of God weak.

I think the dependency of God’s existence in Descartes’ proof on the idea of His / Her existence in the human mind is insufficient to be a proof of His/ Her existence. The fact Descartes asserts that the imperfect cannot be the origin of the perfect is a weak premise in proving the existence of God. Moreover, Descartes describes the nature of God ‘’infinite, eternal, unchanging, all- knowing, all-powerful’’ (Descartes, p.20), while confirming that we are imperfect. At the same time, he claims that we (the imperfect) have the ability to perceive God (the perfect). Looking into Descartes’ arguments, I will try to resolve this puzzle.

To start with the dependence of the existence of God in the human mind; Descartes uses the example of the triangle to prove God’s existence. In fact, he takes advantage of the example to distinguish between the ‘nature’ of a being and the ‘essence’ of a being (Nolan)). He confirms that having an idea of the nature of a being (the total angles of a triangle are 180) does not necessarily mean that it does exist, even though the fact about its nature is accurate. On the other hand, Descartes asserts that having an idea about the nature of a supremely perfect being confirms its existence because its perfection includes its own existence.

To respond to Descartes’ argument that the idea of such a perfect being is enough to indicate that it does exist, I argue that his idea makes God’s existence limited to one condition, which is the existence of Him or Her within us. Descartes makes God’s existence dependent on the existence of its idea in our minds. If a being’s existence is not independent by its own, that means that it is inferior to the being on which it depends. An inferior being to us cannot be God by any means.

In evaluation of the fact that Descartes does not prove the existence of God outside the human mind, I claim that it makes his optimistic approach less strong. To support my claim, I argue that what makes a being perfectly supreme is its ability to exist both inside the human mind and apart of it, because Descartes asserts that ‘’ reason also dictates us that our thoughts cannot all be true’’ (Descartes, p.22). According to this assertion, our idea of a perfect being could be both false and true. If it were true, it would follow that a perfect being exists and if it were false, it would follow that it does not. In this sense, Descartes’ approach in proving the existence of God is not reliable because it does not lead to absolute certainty.

Descartes points that what makes a being perfect is for it to have all kind of perfections plus its existence. If God is the perfect being that is the source of all perfection, He or She should exist. When he is unable to explain the existence of that idea, he suggests that God put the idea into him. He justifies that by arguing that a perfect idea should come from a perfect being.

To respond to his arguments ,I claim that the origin of the idea of God can be man himself, considering that people perceive God differently even if they are following the same religious doctrine. Some people perceive God as a strict teacher who waits people to sin in order to punish them. Others perceive God as a loving father who saves and forgives His/ Her children whatever they do. If God is an unchanged being as Descartes claims, but we perceive Him or Her differently because of various individual factors and differences, that means that our idea of God is different from his actual being. It follows that what Descartes proved is the existence of God as an idea in our minds not the existence of God as an actual being.
To respond to Descartes’ claims that a less perfect being cannot be the origin of a more perfect being; looking at nature we see that the origin of oceans and seas (more perfect) is drops of water (less perfect). A philosophical example is Nietzsche’s idea of the Superman whose origin is Nietzsche himself who is less perfect than his Superman theory. Consequently and to assess these objections, I claim that imperfect beings can be the origin of more perfect beings even though the perfect beings appear perfect without the contribution of the imperfect beings. It follows according to Descartes’ approach that perfect beings only come from other perfect beings, and imperfect beings only come from other imperfect beings. That means that God (the perfect) cannot be the origin of us (the imperfect). This contradicts with Descartes’ description of God as ‘’all- powerful’’ (Descartes, p.20) because it indicates the nature of God’s ability to do and be anything.

To resolve the puzzle of the ability of the imperfect to conceive the perfect, Descartes justifies our capability to do so by arguing that God put this idea into us. This indicates that we could not conceive it if he did not do otherwise, which means that we cannot conceive the existence of the more perfect beings than we are, unless they allow us to do so. Accordingly, the less perfect beings cannot conceive the more perfect beings without the permission of the superior beings. It should follow then that people whom God does not put into them the idea of a perfect being do not conceive God’s being because it is beyond their capabilities.

According to Descartes’ approach, if we do not conceive the idea of God within ourselves, we cannot conceive His /Her existence. Following Descartes’ criterion of true and false, if we do not ‘clearly and distinctly’ conceive things or beings, it means that it is not true (Descartes, p.19). Because Descartes’ ontological argument ’’ is grounded in two central tenets of his philosophy — the theory of innate ideas and the doctrine of clear and distinct perception’’ (Nolan)), things or beings cannot exist when they are not true. If God’s existence cannot be conceived clearly and distinctly, it follows that His /Her existence is not true. Thus, He/ She does not exist. This is how I assess Descartes’ arguments.

Based on the previous arguments, I do not find the reasoning of Descartes’ arguments in proving the existence of God strong enough. This is what Nolan confirms in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy when he says : ‘’ the so-called ontological "argument" is not a formal proof at all but a self-evident axiom grasped intuitively by a mind free of philosophical prejudice’’ (Nolan)).


Works Cited

Descartes, RENE'. Discourse on the Method for Conducting One's Reason Well and for Seeking Truth in the Sciences Translated by Donald A.Cress. Indianapolis/Cambridge : Hackett Publishing Company , 1998.

Nolan), Standford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Lawrence. Descartes' Ontological Argument . Standford , 18 JUN 2001.

No comments:

Post a Comment