Descarte

This paper is intended to explain and evaluate Descartes' proof for the existence of god in Meditation Three. It shall show the weaknesses in the proof, but also give credit to the strengths in his proof. It will give a background of what Descartes has already accepted as what he truly knows. The paper will also state Descartes two major points for the existence of God and why the points can easily be proven false. The paper will also show that if a God does exist that God can in fact be an evil deceiver. The paper will also show that the idea of a perfect being cannot be conceived by an imperfect being.

Descartes starts the meditation by saying what he has already learned in the first two meditations. He states all that he affirms as what he truly knows,

"I am a thinking thing, that is to say, which doubts which affirms, which denies, which knows a few things, which is ignorant of many, which loves which hates, which wills, which rejects, which imagines also, and which senses" (33 lines19-22 Descartes, Lafleur)

Descartes then states that he wishes to extend his knowledge through knowledge in his own self. He judges things that he once knew as fact to possibly now be doubtful and uncertain and that all his prior knowledge could have just been a work from a deceitful God. If then he wishes to learn from within himself and a deceitful God does in fact exist how can he affirm any knowledge within himself or even any knowledge he has affirmed through his meditations? If ideas that he once had now seemed uncertain then does that not mean all he knows can just be a work of a deceitful God, if of course a God does exist.

Descartes after saying he wishes to learn more within him and wants to prove to a level of certainty that God does in fact exist. His first major point is a valid one in that something cannot proceed from nothing. Considering this statement a God could very well exist as a creator, but Descartes states that God is a perfect being and further describes God as follows,

"I conceive a supreme God, eternal, infinite, immutable, omnipotent, an the universal creator of all things that exist outside of himself." (39 lines 8-11 Descartes, Lafleur)

Although this statement does reflect that God is a creator, it also states that God is eternal, infinite, immutable, and omnipotent. Someone can't assume that because you are a creator you are also eternal, infinite, immutable, and omnipotent. Is that to say if you can create life you are also eternal, infinite, immutable, and omnipotent. Furthermore an argument can be made that if something cannot come from nothing, then what or who made God? Descartes tries to answer this question by saying that God created himself, but wouldn't this in fact prove that spontaneous generation can happen leading to the fact that something can come from nothing thus negating the existence of God.

Descartes claims that God is all-powerful and completely good, yet gives no proof that God is good. If of course Descartes' belief is accepted. You assume that God does exist and that he is all powerful and that the idea of a perfect being does exist only because God put that idea there, then what is to say God is not an evil deceiver who can put any thought that God wishes you to think inside your head. What is to stop an all-powerful being, such as God, from doing as he wishes to you? Throughout human history it has been proven all to many times that everyone who has ever had power, has in one way or another, used that power to hurt someone else. What is to say that God would not do the same thing? If God created man, then wouldn't all likenesses of man be derived directly from God? If all ideas come from the mind, and the idea of a perfect being was put there by God then what is to say that God would not put any ideas that he wishes just to deceive you. If Descartes had focused more on why God isn't an evil deceiver then the proof of a God as Descartes explains would be a lot more acceptable

Descartes second argument that God exists is that since he exists God must exist. He starts this argument out with a question,

"From who do I derive my existence? There are four possible answers: from myself, or from my parents, or from some source less perfect from God, or from God."(135 lines 11-14 Pearl)

Descartes believes if he can demonstrate that he could not have been derived from the first three sources, he will have, given the truth of the casual principle proved God's existence. (135 lines 15-18 Pearl)

He admits that his parents were at least part of the cause, but then says he can continue to live without them. He goes on to say that the same power is required to keep someone in existence as to create him for the first time. This is a very valid point but the

...