Pragmatic Argument For God's Existence Essay

Pragmatic Argument for God’s Existence

For centuries philosophers have been theorizing about the existence of God. This issue is

still a very controversial topic even today in the twenty-first century. Philosophers have tried to

distinctively describe the essence/nature of God seemingly to no avail. By examining the

pragmatist’s argument for God’s existence, I will be able to identify any weaknesses, if any with

this argument, and determine whether it undermines belief in God.

Pragmatic philosophers assess a theory’s validity by testing the theory from an

ontological (logical) approach. According to the eleventh century monk St. Anselm, “God is a

deity that is greater than the greatest thought. In order for you to think of God, He must exist”

(Solomon, Higgins,

and Martin 133). Seventeenth century pragmatist Rene´ Descartes´ argues
that God’s existence is based upon a property of perfection. He says that perfection is essential to
God’s being because that’s the essence of God. It is necessary for God to have this property to
make Him the most perfect being” (Solomon, Higgins, and Martin 133). Philosopher Thomas
Aquinas also shares five cosmological (causes) and teleological (design) arguments for God’s
existence. First, he argues that God’s existence is proved by motion. Aquinas shares there have
to be a first mover to move everything else. The world we live in is moving. No object moves
itself. Aquinas credits God as being the first mover and He puts everything else into motion.
Secondly, he established the argument of the first cause. Everything has a cause and nothing can
happen without a cause. Nothing causes itself, therefore according to Aquinas, the first cause
King 2
must be God. Thirdly, he poses the argument of the necessary being. We find in nature the
possibility of existing or not existing. There was never a time when nothing existed. God was
first and has always existed, so we find our necessity to exist in Him. Therefore, Aquinas
concludes that everything in the universe exist because of God. Fourth, Aquinas suggests that
there is the greatest being. We all consider something to be more or less. Something must be the
best or most good for us to compare everything else to it. There must be something that causes
goodness and establishes perfection. This is what we call God. Aquinas’ fifth argument is the
intelligent designer. We see objects that lack intelligence (trees, night to day, etc.) act in
purposeful ways. There must be a designer that initiated that. If something lacks awareness it
must be directed by something with awareness or intelligence.

That designer must be God

according to Aquinas (Solomon, Higgins, and Martin 139-142).

I would characterize the pragmatic argument for God’s existence as, “trying to find truth

behind beliefs and theories as to whether God exist by utilizing practical application”. However,

many philosophers agree that a major weakness of the pragmatic argument is there is no way of

proving whether the premises are true. Atheists believe that the pragmatic’s arguments are

manipulative and full of trickery, therefore they want no part of believing that God exist.

In conclusion, no philosopher to date have definitively pinpointed whether God does or

does not exist. As with any argument, there are pros and cons to be taken into consideration. I

did not find the cons to undermine believing in God. Like Blaise Pascal, I too am willing to

wager that God exists. Worst case scenario, if God doesn’t exist then I have forfeited a few

worldly pleasures, but if God does exist, I have an infinite reward which is Heaven (Solomon,

Higgins, and Martin 154-155). I find that the pragmatic argument is very logical, reasonable,

sound, and valid. Therefore, I conclude that God

exists.