Meditation on First Philosophy, by Rene Descartes http://classicallibrary.org/descartes/meditations/ - Essay Example

Meditation on First Philosophy by Rene Descartes I agree with Descartes’ reasoning behind the existence of God. To help prove his argument, Descartes tries to understand where the idea of God originally came from. In his third meditation, Descartes states that ideas come from three different sources: innate ideas, adventitious ideas, and invented ideas. Innate ideas are naturally within us; adventitious ideas are derived from our own personal experiences; and invented ideas are linked directly to our imaginations.

Our idea of God comes from any one of these three sources. In continuing his thoughts further, Descartes states how he is a finite substance, whereas God is an infinite substance. To put it another way, God cannot be measured by time or our thoughts and actions because He is outside of these realms. Because of this, the concept of God could not have originated from Descartes’ mind, but from God Himself. As such, this is proof that God must exist. I tend to agree with this premise and conclusion because Descartes presents all his ideas logically.

Descartes states: There only remains, therefore, the idea of God, in which I must consider whether there is anything that cannot be supposed to originate with myself. By the name God, I understand a substance infinite, eternal, immutable, independent, all-knowing, all- powerful, and by which I myself, and every other thing that exists, if any such there be, were created. Descartes admits that no one can prove that God exists, yet he also argues that no one can prove that God does not exist.

I strongly agree with this because so many times you hear someone arguing against God’s existing for the very fact that He cannot be proven, yet the counter-argument does not offer up a suitable alternative. At the end of this meditation, Descartes concludes that logic and reason cannot be used when dealing with God; belief in God requires a leap of faith by the individual concerned. In his fourth meditation, Descartes attempts to confirm that God is no deceiver. To help prove this, Descartes explains how God could not possibly deceive someone because deception is a sign of weakness.

As Descartes already proved that God is perfect, it would be fallible for God to show any sign of weakness because he would be less than Himself. In other words, He would not be God. I think that this view is true because his premise has no imperfections with it. If someone is perfect, then they cannot reduce themselves to being anything less than perfect. Deceiving another person would be an obvious example of this, so Descartes’ premise cannot be false. Other people are less than perfect and thus are the ones who may deceive Descartes; not God.

Too many people look to blame God whenever something goes wrong simply because He is an easy scapegoat. Descartes’ conclusion sums up his thought and ideas perfectly: God, I say, who, as supremely perfect, cannot, without a contradiction, be the cause of any error.