Philosophical Skepticism, Existence of God, Knowledge and Metaphysics - Essay Example

? of Philosophical Skepticism, Existence of God, Knowledge and Metaphysics Understanding the Philosophical Phrase, “I think, therefore I am”: Rene Descartes is known for many reasons but his pursuit of truth or skepticism has been an ultimate reason behind researchers’ food for thought. Among various philosophical phrases, Rene Descartes has his famous phrase notified. The famous phrase by Rene Descartes was Cogito ergo Sum which means, I think, therefore I am” (Descartes). The phrase has its philosophical significance because it shows the urge of Rene behind finding the truth of his presence. Descartes made it evident to the scientific researchers that the basis of finding the truth is doubt. Within the context of skepticism and doubting for finding the truth, the phrase becomes easy to understand. It shows that Descartes doubted his thinking ability which is the proof of his presence and existence. In other words, it could be said that if one is longing to find out about his own existence then it is the proof that he is alive because he is skeptical of his existence. In addition to the understanding of the phrase, it is important to understand the way Descartes has implied his philosophical statement on himself. Descartes makes a clear supposition that he has different biological senses including his sight, his touch, his ability to smell, his ability to hear and to think. These senses connect him to the logical world where he yearns to find out the truth in science. In this way, Rene Descartes proved his existence to be truth of science. Thinking is the basis of Rene Descartes belief on existence of humans. In simpler words, Rene Descartes claims every human to be conscious who is able to think. 2. Hume and Kant: A dogmatic Awakening: Immanuel Kant, being a philosopher who raised the curiosity regarding the relationship of cause and effect and scientific laws based his final publication on the analysis of David Hume’s skepticism towards reason. Kant referred that David Hume has “awakened him from his dogmatic slumber” (Kant). In literal meanings, David Hume basically raised awareness regarding future metaphysics. He claimed that experiences that one would go through in the past are less likely to repeat in the future. It is basically the conscience of humans to categorize their experiences. The beliefs of cause and effect regarding experiences and past had prevailed over the years merely because of the supposition of their occurrence in the future. In other words, it could be said that Hume made it clear that there is no justified ground in metaphysics that shows relation between cause and effect. It is merely a human’s habit or conscience that stresses on him to believe that there is a cause and effect to every experience that has undertaken in the past and is likely to happen in the future. Most of the critics believed that Immanuel Kant challenged by David Hume. But the real context to the statement was that justification by Hume provided a logical ground to the metaphysics knowledge where the dogmatic slumber is referred to the idea of uncertainty. 3. World through the lens of Descartes, Spinoza and Leibnitz: The world and its creation is a truth in itself which has influenced many skeptics such as Descartes, Spinoza and Leibnitz. In the flair of pursuit of truth, Rene Descartes believed that world was a home to physical bodies, God and mind. This may also refer to substance pluralism that he believed in more than one material. The world through the lens of Descartes is supposedly based upon the understanding of one’s mind. The curiosity to know beyond one thinking is only possible for the God. Second to the thought of Descartes, it can be said that Baruch Spinoza claimed that world was a setting of God who is present philosophically. It is the belief of a person to think that there is such a setting of God. Gottfried Leibniz claimed his notion regarding the world and the rational belief on knowledge. He mentioned that there is no such existence of world and that every instance of life is a monad. In his own understanding to the world, monad is a unit of reality that might represent the substances present in the universe. 4. Existence of God: The existence of God has been questioned by a number of philosophers leading in a number of arguments claiming the existence of God to be of skeptical. There are many arguments posed to the existence of God which have been divided intro further philosophical categories. The two strongest arguments include the theological moral argument while the second rational (practical) argument concerning existence of God. Considering the theological grounds of explanation of existence of God, the strongest arguments were posed by Thomas Aquinas in the ontological field. He noted that God is great and that God existence is evident. His three determined aspects noted that God is greatest conceivable being, it is greater to exist than not to exist and Therefore God exist (Craig). The argument claiming the existence of God has also been posed in the Hindu religion. The religion deities have been considered as the sons and daughters of God. The existence of God has been claimed to be truthful in Hinduism because the Karma learning provides a bases to the philosophy of greatness of God. The karma studies provide the basis with the fact that every person is different in terms of wealth and inner peace. It is beyond the understanding of men to create such difference among the people. Only God can create man kind and the species. It is the God who can further maintain their lives as per the deeds they get involved in. The weakness of the argument can be termed as the understanding of the word God. The claim has been posed in a predicate manner where the explanation of God is missing. Similar critical appraisal has been proposed by Immanuel Kant. 5. Problem of Evil and the Responses to the Challenge: The concern of problem evil is basically an interrogation regarding the presence of evil despite having clear ordained beliefs of God. This is a challenge which has been posed to almost every religion of the world where the God being omnipotent, omniscient or omnibenevolent has the power. There are many responses which have been states against the problem of evil. Considering free will which has been given to the mankind by God, it is still the choice of mankind to think regarding his own actions. In order to understand the response of free will to the problem of evil, it is highly imperative to note that evil can be of several types. One can be moral evil which is surely an act of a man to affect others. Secondly, evil are caused by natural disasters such as volcano eruption, earthquake. In such a evil undertaking, free will does not have role to play. Moral evil is rather a consequence of free will. This notes that free will as a response does not finish the problem but rather mitigates it. Another response to the problem of evil is justice after life. If a man is aware that his deeds and actions will be accustomed in the life after death then he is more likely to involve himself in the evil deeds. Despite having a freewill, a man with a fear of being justified as an evil person in the life after death will be less prone to undertake moral evil (Adams). 6. Rationalist and Empiricism Approaches to knowledge: Rationalism and empiricism are two grounds of providing a philosophical assertion to the concept of knowledge. There is a clear distinction between the two philosophical grounds in terms of logic and reason. The arguments which are set in the two grounds are mostly referring to the concept of sources to the knowledge. Taking the rationalist approach to knowledge under consideration, it becomes easy to note that rationalist believe the knowledge comes from the sensory experiences. Empiricist on the other hand believe that that real approach to knowledge is to have skeptical thinking manner. The knowledge accumulated by the rationalist is heavily dependent upon the case of logic. It will not be incorrect to state that rationalist is heavily dependent upon the deduction method. The knowledge which is gained by the intellect and deductive approach has a reason to its classification. The accumulation of knowledge is basically a truth which is gained by skepticism. On the other hand, the knowledge accumulation by empiricism claim that the rejection of thesis of claiming the reasons to be the sole of source of knowledge. The approach to knowledge that best defines inquires of mathematics is rationalist views. However, there are some of subjects in mathematics that can be solved with the help of empiricist approach. Taking into consideration the calculation of mathematics 5+7=12 can only be solved by the empiricist approach to knowledge. Other branches of science such as physics etc. can be well understood with the approach of rationalist. Works Cited Adams, M. The Problem of Evil. London: Oxford University Press, 1990. Craig, W. Contending with Christianity's Critics: Anwering New Atheists and Other Objectors. New York: B&H Publishing Group, 2009. Descartes, R. Discourse on the Method of Rightly Conducting the Reason, and Seeking Truth in the Sciences. New York: Forgotten Books, 1927. Kant, I. Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics. new York: Forgotten Books, 1985. Read More