Elizabeth Hobenson
ARQ_1
Descartes Meditations p 43 (begin at "for example when I imagine a triangle)-p 44 (end at "a horse that has wings")
1)What does the word “essence” mean in philosophy? Look it up in the dictionary and use it in a sentence that shows you understand its meaning
According to the dictionary, the word “essence” in philosophy means the attribute or set of attributes that make an entity or substance what it fundamentally is, and which it has by necessity, and without which it loses its identity. Descartes argues that God is real or true based on the fact that he knows what “God” is fundamentally, or God’s essence, without really knowing whether God exists.
2) Can you imagine a triangle with five sides? Why or why not?
…show more content…
No, I cannot imagine a triangle with five sides because the idea of a triangle can be demonstrated through several properties, such as, “three angles that are equal to two right angles, and its longest side is opposite its largest angle.” The very idea of a triangle is dependent upon only having three sides, or a three-sided essence, because any more and the identity of it changes to a square, pentagon, or another polygon.
3) What does Descartes think he can conclude from the fact that triangles have “a determinate essence?”
Descartes thinks he can conclude the fact that triangles have “a determinate essence” because triangles have an essence which he can “perceive clearly” even in his mind. In other words, he can bring this idea out of his mind without any external influence, making it true according to his ideas in the fourth meditation that whatever I can plainly, without any doubt, identify in the idea of something is true with regards to that thing. Therefore, because Descartes can clearly identify the basic properties of triangles using only his mind, then these properties must be true attributes of the idea of a triangle.
4) What feature(s) does Descartes think form the essence of
…show more content…
God? Descartes states that the essence of God is that he is the perfect being, or the “supremely perfect being,” which means that his essence consists of all possible “perfections,” and that includes existence (“And that if belongs to God’s nature that he always exists”). 5) What is Descartes trying to prove about God in this reading?
(Note—you don’t need to say how he proves it—just what he’s trying to prove).
Descartes is trying to prove that God, if Descartes correctly defines God as the being consisting of all possible perfections in a single entity, must exist. God cannot be otherwise envisioned or realized except for the fact of his existence.
6) In the last sentence of the passage, Descartes tells us that thinking of a god that did not exist would mean imagining would be imagining god as lacking something. What would he be lacking? (It’s okay to use Descartes’ words here?
Descartes states that thinking of a god that did not exist would mean imagining God lacking “a supreme perfection” constituting the perfection of existence. If God is the existence of “a supreme perfection,” according to Descartes, then the perfect being, that consists of all possible perfections, must also have the perfection of existence. This argument is the same as his triangle argument, because triangle’s essence is in that it must possess the property of having three sides.
7) What, to your mind, was the most thought-provoking part of this reading, and
why? I thought that the most thought-provoking part of this reading was that Descartes uses the essence or “definition” of God, a supremely perfect being, and makes a logical argument that cannot technically be disproven unless its found that an entity that is absolutely perfect in all ways cannot exist. We are able to see imperfection, but we are unable to disprove the idea of the existence of absolute perfection because we have either not encountered it or cannot perceive it.
At the start of the meditation, Descartes begins by rejecting all his beliefs, so that he would not be deceived by any misconceptions from reaching the truth. Descartes acknowledges himself as, “a thing that thinks: that is, a thing that doubts, affirms, denies, understands a few things, is ignorant of many things” He is certain that that he thinks and exists because his knowledge and ideas are both ‘clear and distinct’. Descartes proposes a general rule, “that whatever one perceives very clearly and very distinctly is true” Descartes discovers, “that he can doubt what he clearly and distinctly perceives is true led to the realization that his first immediate priority should be to remove the doubt” because, “no organized body of knowledge is possible unless the doubt is removed” The best probable way to remove the doubt is prove that God exists, that he is not a deceiver and “will always guarantee that any clear and distinct ideas that enter our minds will be true.” Descartes must remove the threat of an invisible demon that inserts ideas and doubts into our minds to fool us , in order to rely on his ‘clear and distinct’ rule.
The problem of the evil deceiver leads Descartes into determining where God exists, who Descartes believes will discredit the notion of an evil deceiver. Descartes does not only have to prove the existence of God, but must attribute one essential quality to God: omnibenevolence. For God to trump this evil deceiver, God must possess the highest quality of goodness. Thus, the existence of God as an omnibenevolent entity voids the existence of an evil deceiver, for an all-good God would not deceive humans. In turn, by proving the existence of God, Descartes disproves the existence of the evil deceiver and solidifies Descartes understandings of truth. After discussing the necessity of assuring God’s existence, Descartes follows his piece with the actual argument proving the existence of God. Desecrates provides several lines of reasoning for proving God, but one of the most compelling ones revolves around the idea of formal realities versus their existence as ideas and the associated hierarchy of the finite and and the
“Nevertheless”, Descartes claims, “it surely must be admitted that the things seen during slumber are, as it were, like painted images, which could only have been produced in the likeness of true things, and that therefore at least these general things—eyes, head, hands, and the whole body—are not imaginary things but are true and exist.” This argument proposes that the images that we create during dreams are only formed from that which is perceived while awake. From Descartes perspective even though we have reason to question the validity of our perceptions, there is no essential reason to question that we perceive the basic elements of our experience. This he ascribes specifically to mathematics, stating what he describes as “obvious truths.” Specifically, the value of two plus three, or the number of sides of a square; these elements do not change during
Throughout the “Meditations on First Philosophy” Descartes gives a couple of major arguments about the existences of god, he gives one argument in the third meditation and on in the fifth meditation. The argument in meditation three and the one we will focus on is known as the “Trademark Argument”. This argument comes from the fact claimed by Descartes that inside of everyone is a supreme being, which is placed there by whatever created us. From this statement Descartes can say that a mark from a God has been place inside of every one of us. This argument involves the acknowledgement of such an idea is within ourselves, this idea that God is a being who is eternal and infinite and a creator of all things. This is Descartes first premise. His second premise is the “Causal Adequacy Principle.” The p...
Descartes argues that we can know the external world because of God, and God is not a deceiver. Descartes’ core foundation for understanding what is important comes from three points: our thoughts about the world and the things in it could be deceptive, our power of reasoning has found ideas that are indubitable, and certainty come by way of reasoning. Once we have a certainty of God, and ourselves then we are easily able to distinguish reality from dreams, and so on. God created us and gave us reason, which tells us that our ideas of the external world come from God. God has directly provided us with the idea of the external world. The concept of existence, the self, and doubt could not have existed on its own; therefore they had to be created by someone to have put them in our mind. That creator is God, who is omnipotent and perfect. God is not a deceiver to me; God is good, so therefore what I perceive really does exist. God without existence is like a mountain without a valley. A valley does not exist if there is no mountain, and vice versa a mountain is not a mountain with out a valley. We cannot believe or think of God without existence. We know the idea of God, and that idea inevitably contains his existence. My thought on god is clear and distinct that he is existent. Descartes’ now has ‘rebuilt’ the world, solely because of his power and reasoning. Descartes’ is only able...
In this paper, I will explain how Descartes uses the existence of himself to prove the existence of God. The “idea of God is in my mind” is based on “I think, therefore I am”, so there is a question arises: “do I derive my existence? Why, from myself, or from my parents, or from whatever other things there are that are less perfect than God. For nothing more perfect than God, or even as perfect as God, can be thought or imagined.” (Descartes 32, 48) Descartes investigates his reasons to show that he, his parents and other causes cannot cause the existence of himself.
The next stage in the system, as outlined in the Meditations, seeks to establish that God exists. In his writings, Descartes made use of three principal arguments. The first (at least in the order of presentation in the Meditations) is a causal argument. While its fullest statement is in Meditation III, it is also found in the Discourse (Part IV) and in the Principles (Part I §§ 17–18). The argument begins by examining the thoughts contained in the mind, distinguishing between the formal reality of an idea and its objective reality. The formal reality of any thing is just its actual existence and the degree of its perfection; the formal reality of an idea is thus its actual existence and degree of perfection as a mode of mind. The objective reality of an idea is the degree of perfection it has, considered now with respect to its content. (This conception extends naturally to the formal and objective reality of a painting, a description or any other representation.) In this connection, Descartes recognized three fundamental degrees of perfection connected with the capacity a thing has for independent existence, a hierarchy implicit in the argument of Meditation III and made explicit in the Third Replies (in response to Hobbes). The highest degree is that of an infinite substance (God), which depends on nothing; the next degree is that of a finite substance (an individual body or mind), which depends on God alone; the lowest is that of a mode (a property of a substance), which depends on the substance for its existence.
Rene Descartes meditations on the existence of God are very profound, thought-provoking, and engaging. From the meditations focused specifically on the existence of God, Descartes uses the argument that based on his clear and distinct perception that cannot be treated with doubt, God does exist. In the beginning of the third meditation, Descartes proclaims that he is certain he is a thinking thing based on his clear and distinct perception, and he couldn’t be certain unless all clear and distinct perceptions are true. Before diving into the existence of God, Descartes introduces smaller arguments to prove the existence of God. For example, Descartes introduces in his argument that there are ideas in which he possess that exists outside of him. Utilizing the objective versus formal reality, Descartes states “If the objective reality of any of my ideas turns out to be so great that I am sure the same reality does not reside in me, either formally or eminently, and hence that I myself cannot be its cause, it will necessarily follow that I am not alone in the world, but that some other thing which is the cause of this idea exists” (29). In other words, the ideas of objective reality that resides in Descartes can potentially only come from a supreme being, which is God; God possess more objective reality than he does formal reality. We as humans, as Descartes states, are finite substance, and God is the only infinite substance. The only way for us as a finite substance to think of an infinite substance is possible if, and only if, there is an infinite substance that grants us the idea of substance in first place. After these smaller arguments, Descartes states that while we can doubt the existence of many things, due to the fact that ...
He argues that if he does not solve God’s existence, he will not be certain about anything else. Thus, Descartes says that he has an idea of God and, therefore, God exists. However, in order to be certain of His existence, Descartes provides proofs that will illustrate his reasoning. The four proofs include formal reality vs. objective reality, something can’t arise from nothing, Descartes cannot be the cause of himself, and therefore, the bigger cause is God. Now that Descartes knows God is real, he must solve another aspect, which is if God can be a deceiver.
After settling that God exists in his first few passages, Descartes adds that God is the perfect being. Due to the fact that he understands what a perfect being is, than God must be a sovereign being. Similar to his triangle theory that it is not a necessity to imagine a triangle. It is not a necessity to imagine a perfect being rather a thought that has run through our mind. The triangle as imagined and conceived has three sides and a hundred and eighty degree angles as always. It is imperative that these characteristics are always attributed to the triangle, likewise the attributes of a perfect being are placed on God.
According to Descartes, the essence of material substance is simply extension, the property of filling up space. (Med. V) So solid geometry, which describes the possibility of dividing an otherwise uniform space into distinct parts, is a complete guide to the essence of body. It follows that there can be in reality only one extended substance, comprising all matter in a single spatial whole. From this, Descartes concluded that individual bodies are merely modes of the one extended being, that there can be no space void of extension, and that all motion must proceed by circular vortex. Thus, again, the true nature of bodies is understood by pure thought, without any information from the senses.
Descartes emphasizes the idea that his idea of God's existence does not originate from his senses. Rather than having created the idea himself, he states that God himself imprinted the idea on him. “Thus the only option remaining is that this idea is innate in me just as the idea of myself is innate in me” (Descartes, 34). If a person is to believe that innate ideas exist, it follows that the existence of innate ideas is a truth.
Next, in the fourth meditation, which leads into Descartes’ thoughts on himself in God’s view. It is important to compare to the third meditation. A second point of view of not just an idea, but now Descartes himself. He asks why a perfect being such as God does not make a perfect being like Descartes himself. He questions why he is not perfect in that sense. Then he explains, it would take much arrogance to question the motives of God. Not only that, but it just simply cannot be comprehended. He rejects the trial, and simply believes; since he himself is not perfect, the idea as a whole may be. He is just a part of the “big picture.” He then concludes he should only make judgements on what he is certain of.
...rity and distinction, but we can conclude what Descartes means. He is saying that we can be sure that these primary qualities exist in bodies in the same way that they do in our ideas of bodies. This cannot be claimed for qualities such as heat, color, taste and smell, of which our ideas are so confused and vague that we must always reserve judgment. This can be seen in the wax example.
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.