All Knowing And Powerful God Philosophy Essay
PHIL 201: Introduction to Philosophy; Short paper #1
February 28, 2013
Was God the creature that created the earth and all the beings that live on it? Descartes explains his third meditation and others in their theory’s give arguments trying to show why they believe that there is an all knowing and powerful God that has created all the shapes and colors that they sees in their every day lives. In this paper I will go in and show why Rene Descartes and a few others are wrong in saying that God exists and was the creator of all we know.
Rene Descartes was a French philosopher who is highly known as the father of the modern age philosophy. He took on this title mainly because of the questioning and challenging of the "normal" way of thinking for the time period he was brought up in. Descartes was known for a wide range of things, but I am only focusing on his work of the Meditations on First Philosophy. In the Meditations, Descartes is seeking to find a system of stable, lasting and certain knowledge, which he can ultimately claim as the truth. He runs into a so called "fork in the road". How can he connect the knowledge of self with the rest of the world? This is where Descartes comes up with the third meditation (Bergdorf Goodman, Web).
There are a few concepts that need to be known about the Third Meditation. Concept number one deals with the different kinds of reality. By this I am talking about reality’s relationship with the mind or "soul". The next concept of the Third Meditation, Descartes examines the proof of God’s existence to its degree of reality. Finally, the last concept Descartes explains is the premise that of the causal adequacy principle. "Descartes overall goal of obtaining a system of certain, lasting, and stable knowledge: that of using the existence of God to bridge the gap between knowledge of self and knowledge of the external world." (Goodman). So Descartes really has no proof that God exists, he is only going off what he thinks while he is going through his meditations. There is no backing of his word or proof that there is any existence of God. He is merely just going off of what he simply thinks while he is going through the meditations.
In his meditations Descartes explains that God is a perfect being who is an all knowing being that has created everything and everyone. He also goes on saying that he himself is not perfect therefore he cannot be God and cannot think of one. He also goes through and makes the statement that something cannot be created from nothing so Descartes says that God has to be the creator of all. But there is a flaw in his statement. If something cannot be created from nothing then how can God be the creator of everything to exist? Descartes makes an invalid statement here because where does God come from and who created him to go on to create everything else that we know to exist?
One reason Descartes believes in the existence is that because he believes in morality, which this brings me the morality argument which is a very old and highly argued over in the world of philosophy. "This argument is very old, and states that God must exist for the following reason: 1. An aspect of morality is observed. 2. Belief in God is a better explanation for this morality than any alternative. 3. Belief in God is thus preferable to disbelief in God." (Flamehorse). This argument follows closely to what Descartes explains in his third meditation. While he is sitting there thinking and meditating he says that he is a thinking thing therefore that makes him an actual "being" so he tentatively says. So that shows that he believes in mortality, but mortality is merely universial. "Thomas Hobbes argued that mortality is based on the society around it, and is thus not objective." (Flamehorse). So Descartes is basing what he thinks off nothing but his so called "word". Why should anyone believe what he has said about the existence of God when there is no solid proof or findings that God has ever existed. Another famous argument that fallows exactly what Descartes says in his third meditation is the Cosmological Argument. Thomas Aquinas was the man that became known very well from this Gods creation theory. This theory basically says that every finite and contingent being has a cause, Nothing Finite and contingent can cause itself, a causal chain cannot be of infinite length, and finally therefore, a first cause must exist. It only took time to show all of the flaws that happened to be wrong with this theory because this came to be, before there was any knowledge of the earth and how it came to be. So before everyone knew how the earth was created people were still trying to find how everything came to be so when this theory popped up it was intriguing and to everyone then made sense of how everything came to be. Once "The Big Bang" was found out the Cosmological Argument change what it said and now became: Whatever begins to exist has a cause, the universe began to exist, and therefore, the universe had a cause. So if everything that exists had to have a cause what caused the universe? If one kept looking for what caused what they run into the problem of Infinite regression. So, therefore how can everything have a cause? There would never be a first cause. This proving that God cannot be the creator of everything because there has to be something greater and more powerful than him that would have to of created him.
In conclusion I strongly believe that God does not exist and could not have been the one that created everyone and everything. First, because there has been no proof and any findings of artifacts that show that he has even existed. Second, is that Descartes was basing everything off of what he was thinking in his meditations. Finally, God could not be the creator of everything because everything that exists has a cause which means God would need a cause to exist.