God Flashcards
Mediations 1: Could God be deceiving me all the time
Descartes is doubting everything and this raises the question is God deceiving him.
many of Descartes contemporaries would have argued that our a priori truths (space, time, numbers etc) were all certain. But Descartes as a voluntarist, this means he believes that God does not have to operate within these “eternal truths”. Therefore it is not logically impossible (indoubtable) for the eternal truths of mathematics and logic to be otherwise.
so God could be deceiving us-however that would go against who God is-balance it out-evil demon.
Meditations 3: 1st argument for the existence of God. CAP and Trademark
CAP:
objective reality must come from something. What it comes from must have at least as much formal reality as the idea has objective reality.
formal reality: how much perfection something has
objective reality: how perfect is my idea of it
An idea of a tree has as much objective reality as an actual tree has formal reality. Descartes has greater formal reality than the idea of the tree has objective reality and therefore Descartes would argue that he could have caused his idea of the tree.
Trademark:
this is what Descartes develops from CAP.
What is Descartes clear and distinct idea of God?
“A God who is sovereign, eternal, infinite, unchangeable, all-knowing, all powerful and the universal creator of all things”
based on the difference between Descartes’s formal reality and his idea of God’s objective reality.
I have an idea of God which is all the things Descartes has suggested he is, therefore he must have more objective reality than I have formal reality. This means I cannot have created/caused my idea of God. And the only possible creator with enough perfection/formal reality to have done so is God himself-therefore God must exist.
Meditations 3: 1st argument for the existence of God. How does Descartes test his argument
-doesn’t really have an idea of a perfect etc God only what he calls a “negation of the finite”-he is only thinking of something which is the opposite of imperfect. So how does he know God is perfect and more than something which is just not imperfect.
Meditations 3: 1st argument for the existence of God. Represent and resemble.
Descartes did not recognise the distinction between resembles and represents, he believed ideas automatically resemble what they represent.
for example an idea of bravery cannot resemble bravery but it can represent it. My idea of bravery is a knight in shining armour this cannot resemble bravery but is does represent it.
our idea of God doesn’t resemble God but represents him and therefore does not have to be perfect because it is only a representation. So Descartes could have caused his idea.
Meditations 3: 1st argument for the existence of God. Ideas are not models.
If my idea of perfection is a “powerful and intelligent being” then I have a poor idea of God because perfection is so much more than that and any idea I can conceive.
example my idea of paris is never going to be as complex as the real thing therefore does not have as much perfection as the real thing.
Meditations 5: 2nd argument for the existence of God. essence of material things
- that they have necessary a prior truths eg a triangle has to have 3 sides, 3 angles which add up to 180. However we cannot draw/the perfect triangle does not physically exist due to human error
- all things have the essence of extension even if they don’t exist.
- what is the essence of God-perfection
Meditations 5: 2nd argument for the existence of God: The Ontological argument
St Anselm
been known as the ontological argument since Kant in the 18th century.
Premise 1: I have an idea of God, that is to say, an idea of a perfect being
Premise 2: A perfect being must have all perfections
Premise 3: existence is part of perfection
conclusion: God exists
Problem-the idea that existence is part of perfection-the perfect triangle can’t exist.
Mediations 5: 2nd argument for the existence of God. Gaunilo’s
The perfect island
premise 1: I have an idea of a perfect island
premise 2: a perfect island must have all perfections
premise 3: existence is a perfection
conclusion:the perfect island exists
But the perfect island clearly doesn’t exist-disproving Descartes argument.
Meditations 5: 2nd argument for the existence of God. How is perfection part of existence.
God must exist in the same way the triangle must have 3 sides or that you cannot have a mountain without a valley.
Meditations 5: 2nd argument for the existence of God. What would happen if I didn’t consider God at all?
Descartes view of people: imperfect and finite evil is necessary to know what good is and much in the same way God is necessary for us to recognise we are imperfect and finite.
Mediations 5: 2nd argument for the existence of God. Existence is not a predicate
Knat’s objection
-best friend’s properties: funny, interesting, clever, kind.
-was one of the properties existence? No, because existence isn’t what makes your best friend your best friend. They just happen to exist-it is not a necessary property.
the same for God:
God is perfect and perfect is omnipotent, benevolent etc. Possible to list the properties of God without existence. Existence isn’t a property. Doesn’t mean he doesn’t exist.
Meditations 6: how can can be sure God is not deceiving us. The Key Question.
is it possible that God could be tricking me about everything? It would mean everything I “know” apart from the cogito could be false including a priori truths such as 3+2=5
how does Descartes deal with this problem?
God has the power to but he doesn’t because he is benevolent
Meditations 6: how can we be sure God is not deceiving us: the Cartesian Circle
God can’t be a deceiver-so we can trust our clear and distinct ideas.
but we need to reply upon our clear and distinct ideas in order to prove God exists.
How does Descartes address this problem?
“I have already proven that God exists I can rely upon my memory to show that I already know this”
“I can use this to trust my other clear and distinct ideas”
Problem-how can he trust his memory
Meditations 6: how we can be sure God is not deceiving us. Biting the Bullet
for our cognitive system is to reliable our best by way of judgement must be foundationally reliable-it is the point where the system is grounded in certainty. This means our best by way of judgement must be veridical and self-guaranteeing. Like the cogito something we cannot doubt but unlike the cogito not a reflexive truth.
Descartes spells out the argument:
my best by way of judgement (clear and distinct ideas) show me that God is a perfect being
such as God would not allow me to be radically misled
I should be radically misled if my best by way of judgement (clear and distinct) were not veridical.
i know that is not the case: it is veridical.
my invoking God he made the argument circular
should have said:
my best by was of judgement is veridical
