Does God actually exist? Who is God? These are questions that intrigue each and every human and strikes at the very heart of human existence. The question of God to have ever been in or being in existence has beleaguered humankind from the time they began to think logically. A majority of philosophers claim that there may be God or numerous God’s whereas some say there may be nothing at all. Humans have only been around for so long that there are only a few fragments of history left to study whether or not God really exists. There is a lack of knowledge or limited knowledge regarding this issue due to which no one can prove or be sure of God being in existence.
The very perception of an absolute perfect being means God has to be in existence, this is the usual ontological, or a priori, argument. St. Anselm was the first person to articulate this argument in the 10th century and argued that because of the idea that people have of an absolute perfect being, which he defined as "that than which nothing greater can be conceived" , it ought to exist. Pros logion, one of St. Anselm’s essays he interpreted God as an actuality who retains all possible perfection. But if this existence "existed" simply as an idea in our cognizance, then it wouldn’t be as perfect as, if it actually existed, something that would thus oppose our classification of God, a being who is thought to be absolutely perfect. Therefore, God must exist. Gaunilo of Marmoutiers tore apart Anselm's idea by requesting people to perceive an island "more excellent" than any other island, enlightening the faults in this kind of argumentation. This type of a priori argument i.e. pure deduction is wholly imperfect, often superfluous, and completely fails to take empirical proof ...
... middle of paper ...
...ist or not. First Definition: God as maker of the entire universe in which we live. Second: Empirical science detects that which is within this universe. We have some kind of a hint about the things that might be beyond it (other cosmoses in cosmology) but we have no straight explanations of such effects. Now: If God is the creator of this universe, it suggests that God had to be reality or in existence before this universe. Overall Relativeness tells us that time and space are related or the same exact thing. As experimental science detects this universe, it does not have indication of whatsoever prevailing or not prevailing external to this universe. Worth stating is that this is a "deistic" argument in the sagacity that it would incline to cast hesitation on the notion of an ethically flawless, individual, domineering (overruling in history of mankind, etc.) god.
The question of God’s existence has been debated through the history of man, with every philosopher from Socrates to Immanuel Kant weighing in on the debate. So great has this topic become that numerous proofs have been invented and utilized to prove or disprove God’s existence. Yet no answer still has been reached, leaving me to wonder if any answer at all is possible. So I will try in this paper to see if it is possible to philosophically prove God’s existence.
after noting that he could be open to error, now by using it as a
...he universe does not have an infinite past. For example, many scientists believed a Big Bang was the origin of the universe. There are several other theories to the universe’s existence. Craig’s argument is logically sound and shows that God does exist. The universe does not have an infinite past, everything has been created by something else, and therefore, God created the universe.
have an idea of a perfect being then it must exist. A cause, he argues
Once Descartes has realized that he can know with certainty that “I exist” is true, he continues to build on his foundation of truths. The truth about the nature of God, proof of God’s existence, and the nature of corporeal objects are considered, among others, after Descartes proves his existence. Descartes’ principal task in the Meditations was to devise a system that would bring him to the truth. He wanted to build a foundation from which all further philosophical inquiry could be built. It was essential that his beliefs were sound. If any one of them were at all in doubt, then it put the credibility of the whole structure of knowledge in jeopardy. I will discuss a few of the topics Descartes analyzes after his epiphany of existence. Throughout the essay, I will raise some doubts that I have pertaining to Descartes’ conclusions as well.
Descartes then explains that the idea of God is the idea of a perfect or Supreme Being. A perfect being could have set this idea in our minds. He discovers that a perfect thing exists and that perfect being is defined as God. Descartes says, “All these attributes are such that, the more carefully I concentrate on them, the less possible it seems that they could have originated from me alone. So from what has been said it must be concluded that God necessarily exists.” Descartes also reveals that God is not a deceiver. Descartes knows that a perfect being has no faults. Deception depends on some defect or fault. Therefore, if a perfect being has no faults then that perfect being can not be a deceiver.
At the beginning of Meditation three, Descartes has made substantial progress towards defeating skepticism. Using his methods of Doubt and Analysis he has systematically examined all his beliefs and set aside those which he could call into doubt until he reached three beliefs which he could not possibly doubt. First, that the evil genius seeking to deceive him could not deceive him into thinking that he did not exist when in fact he did exist. Second, that his essence is to be a thinking thing. Third, the essence of matter is to be flexible, changeable and extended.
It is controversial if existence is a general class that can be categorized into existence in the mind and existence in reality or if there are multiple levels of existence. It is also controversial that there are only two categories of existence, if at all it can be categorized. Hence, for a supreme being, for which, as suggested by Thomas Aquinas, it is not very clear whether humans can perceive all of its qualities, a conclusion that God does not solely exists in the mind, should not lead to a conclusion that it exists in
The existence of God is quite controversial issue. God has different names in the world, and a lot of people, strongly believe in his existence. While, on the other hand, there are also people who don’t believe in his existence. In their discussion entitled “Does God Exist?” William Lane Craig, who is the supporter of the idea of existence of God, debates with Austin Dacey, who is an atheist, on the idea of existence of God. They provide the strong arguments and their debates are quite interesting, and innovative (not similar to those arguments, we usually read about in book). These are the fresh views on the question of existence and non-existence of God.
According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, God is “a being or object believed to have more than natural attributes and powers and to require human worship; specifically: one controlling a particular aspect or part of reality.” (“God”). For a philosopher, however, this concept has proven to be more than a little difficult to solve. According to O’Brien in his book An Introduction to the Theory of Knowledge, “The philosophy of religion is (in part) concerned with whether such a belief is justified.” (177). The belief that O’Brien mentions as being problematic is the belief that the God worshiped by the monotheistic religions such as Judaism, Christianity and Islam is the “supernatural” being who is responsible for creating the universe and can control reality in some way (177). This God is intelligent and has the ability to interfere with human affairs if s/he sees fit, and is “omnipotent (able to do anything), omniscient (knows everything), perfectly good, and eternal.” (177). Many philosophers throughout the ages have tried to prove/disprove the existence of God—men such as René Descartes, George Berkeley, David Hume, Thomas Reid, Bertrand Russell, and Immanuel Kant. Each of these philosophers had a different take on the issue of God, some of them believed that they had proved his/her existence, some believed that they had disproved his/her existence, and the others came to the conclusion that we either can’t know that s/he exists or his/her existence essentially doesn’t effect our lives. Overall, the proposition of “God” creates many epistemological problems that are not easily solved, but there is an a priori argument and two empirical arguments that make valiant attempts.
Baird and Kaufmann, the editors of our text, explain in their outline of Descartes' epistemology that the method by which the thinker carried out his philosophical work involved first discovering and being sure of a certainty, and then, from that certainty, reasoning what else it meant one could be sure of. He would admit nothing without being absolutely satisfied on his own (i.e., without being told so by others) that it was incontrovertible truth. This system was unique, according to the editors, in part because Descartes was not afraid to face doubt. Despite the fact that it was precisely doubt of which he was endeavoring to rid himself, he nonetheless allowed it the full reign it deserved and demanded over his intellectual labors. "Although uncertainty and doubt were the enemies," say Baird and Kaufmann (p.16), "Descartes hit upon the idea of using doubt as a tool or as a weapon. . . . He would use doubt as an acid to pour over every 'truth' to see if there was anything that could not be dissolved . . . ." This test, they explain, resulted for Descartes in the conclusion that, if he doubted everything in the world there was to doubt, it was still then certain that he was doubting; further, that in order to doubt, he had to exist. His own existence, therefore, was the first truth he could admit to with certainty, and it became the basis for the remainder of his epistemology.
In Descartes’ meditations, Descartes begins what Bernard Williams has called the project of ‘pure enquiry’ to discover an indubitable premise or foundation to base his knowledge on, by subjecting everything to a kind of scepticism now known as Cartesian doubt. This is known as foundationalism, where a philosopher basis all epistemological knowledge on an indubitable premise.
On the other hand, many well-known scientists now admit that certain discoveries tend to indicate that God rather does exist than not. The problem, I suggest, lies in certain preconceptions. If we picture God as a person, then the question comes up: where is God?
The concept of God can be a difficult one to grasp especially in today's world - a world in which anyone that believes in God is trying to define exactly what God is. To even attempt to grasp such a concept, one must first recognize his own beliefs in respect to the following questions: Is God our creator? Is God omnipotent (all-powerful) or omniscient (all-knowing) or both? Does God care? Is God with us? Does God interfere with life on earth? These questions should be asked and carefully answered if one should truly wish to identify his specific beliefs in God's existence and persistence.
Throughout the world today, hundreds of different religions exist, and though many have very different beliefs, the similarities between them are almost convincing of a first religion among primitive mankind. But throughout the centuries, different systems and people have evolved, often causing more tension than any other cause. Religions of past and present have often been the source of meaning in people's lives. People in the past have more or less adhered to strict religious doctrines, and lived according to them. But people today face different situations and lifestyles. Times have changed as the human race has changed. Are people still searching? The question still remains: Does God exist, and who is He?