Descartes On God Essay, Research Paper

Upon cursory examination, one might assume that Rene Descartes is a

?non-believer? in the existence of a heavenly being, a God that presides

over humans and gives us faith. However, this is simply not the case ?

Descartes is simply trying to destroy all of the uncertainties that have come

about by the attempted scientific explanations of such a supreme being. For Rene

Descartes and all of the other believers in the world, the existence of God

provides a convenient answer to unexplained questions, while never providing

answers to the questions about God himself. This is evidenced a great deal in

the circular argument made by Descartes in the Meditations on First Philosophy.

What follows is a brief account of the third and fifth meditations, which

provide Descartes? response to the masked question, ?What is God?? Can one

perceive or confirm the existence of an idea that is external to him, an idea

such as God? In order to determine the answer we must start by understanding the

ways in which we can conclude an objects? existence. Descartes explains three

ways in which a person might come to such a conclusion ? the first, through

nature; the second, through feeling a value that is independent of the will of

the object; and the third, the objective reality of an idea, or the ?cause and

effect profile.? The third point is the one that we will primarily spend our

time with. Descartes drills us with the idea that an object will have an effect

when it stems from a legitimate cause, or an initial idea that precedes with

equal or superior properties in one?s intellect. In other words, the mind

generates thoughts and ideas about a physical form, and develops a reality for

this form, through previous schema and beliefs. ?And although an idea may give

rise to another idea, this regress cannot, nevertheless, be infinite; we must in

the end reach a first idea, the cause of which is, as it were, the archetype in

which all the reality that is found objectively in these ideas is contained

formally.? The only problem with Descartes? argument is when the existence

of God arises as a notion, for there is no sustenance or idea for the notion of

God to originate from. Is it possible, then, to create the idea of a finite

being from an infinite existence, outside of the physical and mental, in a state

all of it?s own? Descartes quickly answers that the response would be that a

finite being cannot completely, if at all, comprehend the ideas that would cause

God to exist, and therefore the basis for doubt is lost in an intangible proof.

Additionally, the mere fact that he believes that there is a God provides yet

another piece of proof towards His existence. This must be true, according to

Descartes, with the provision that the idea and belief must have been placed in

his consciousness by an outside factor. The final factor that convinces

Descartes that there is a God is the fact of his own existence, along with the

fact that he, himself, is not a God. This belief stems from the theory that if a

man is independent from all other existence and ideas about forms and matter,

then he has the ability to become infinite. Descartes says that if he himself

were the ?author of his own being? and independent of all existence, then he

would attain a Godly level of existence. Ultimately, it is his own dependence on

another being that proves to him that there is a God. Many people are bred into

religion, or borne into a set of ideas about a particular infinite being. The

interesting problem with most types of faith in this manner is that the

scripture that has been deemed to come from your god is also the proof that God

exists. This is the type of circular definition that Descartes is trying to

avoid at all costs. Basically, it?s like using a word in it?s own

definition, or ?the definition of an apple is an apple.? The argument begins

to get a little bit ambiguous when he begins discussing the uncertainty of his

beliefs. He is, as he claims, as certain of the idea of the sun, the moon, the

earth, even his own rational though, as he is certain of God?s existence. The

most troubling part of the entire section is the understanding of formal and

objective reality. Remember his theory that existence is perfection. To

understand that to have an idea is to exist is one case, but take for instance

the man whom can think, just as someone thinks of God, of a being so absolutely

imperfect, clearly and distinctly, that it does not exist. However, according to

Descartes, since it has an objective reality, it must follow that it also must

have a formal reality as well. Clearly, this is an impossibility which I have

yet to ascertain to the fullest degree. Ayn Rand?s The Fountainhead creates

within it a hero who is so independent that he ceases to exist within the public

eye ? however, he never ceases to exist, as he ends up clearly being dependant

on his own belief of something greater. Whether Rand shared Descartes? view on

the existence of God is uncertain, however can be applied to the entire

argument. If one is without an idea to back him up, one ceases to exist ? but

who created the idea of the being in the first place? And further, who created

and implanted within all beings the existence of a higher, more defined, and

more perfect being? It is through this logic that Descartes attempts, rather

unsuccessfully in my mind, to prove that the existence of God is not a rare leap

of faith but rather a certainty in it?s own perfect, unquestionable and

ultimately non-comprehensible way. He was certainly arrogant, though, in his

thoughts and writings, though, ascribing characteristics to a being that he

himself will never understand fully. In my mind, Descartes exceeded in many

parts of his argument, but failed to prove from a logical standpoint the

existence of a higher being. We, as humans, will take to heart his ideals, but

will continue to work on leaps of faith and the prescribed scriptures and

circular definitions of our own religions.

Descartes, Meditations on the First Philosophy, Hackett Publishing Co.