God 's existence has been a continuous debate certainly for centuries. The issue of God 's existence is debatable because of the different kind of controversies that can be raised from an "Atheist as being the non-believer of God" and a "Theist who is the believer of God". An atheist can raise different objections on the order of the universe by claiming that the science is a reason behind the perfection of the universe. In Aquinas 's fifth argument, he claims that the order of the universe cannot be explained by chance, but only by design and purpose. To explain this order of the universe he concludes that, there is an intelligent being whom we call "God".
Philosopher Saint Thomas Aquinas attempted to justify god’s existence through the study of the cosmos. With this argument, Aquinas borrowed many ideas from the philosopher Aristotle, which actually influenced some of his key parts. Aquinas offers five proofs to god existence in two of his works. Two out of the five are used in the cosmological argument for god’s existence. This cosmological argument is based on the observation of the physical world, which includes the cosmos.
In this essay I will be writing about Blaise Pascal, a mathematician and French philosopher whose work became very popular due to his "Wager". Pascal's argument in his essay "The Wager" states that any rational human should believe in God. He states that regardless of whether or not God exists, the option of believing yields the greatest benefit and the least loss out of all the possibilities. In believing in God, one can receive infinite gain which is heaven, if God exist, and would only have finite losses if God does not exist. However, he shares that if one was to bet against god, if one wins or loses, the individual would either gain an insignificant finite if God does not exist, or lose everything if God does exist which would lead to going to Hell.
Anh Nguyen - PHIL 256 Final Descartes’s arguments for the existence of God and its fallacies Descartes (1596 – 1650) was a French philosopher, mathematician and scientist. At an early age, he received his education from the Jesuits and the experience with the Aristotelian ideals there upset him, yet the field of mathematics fascinated him with its precision, uniform certainty and necessity. This dissonance eventually planted a seed into his mind and drove him to question about the nature of knowledge, namely whether it can match mathematics’ indubitableness. Descartes’ attempts in resolving the problem resulted in his Meditations of First Philosophy (1641), which was written in response to queries regarding his new philosophical basis for a novel way to approach the system of knowledge. Upon its publication, Descartes’ Meditations provoked controversy among the Aristotelians – indeed it was an assault on the Aristotelian
Analysis on 3rd meditation of Rene Descartes on Existence of God In his third meditation, named “The existence of God”, Descartes proves that God exist and the only cause of our clear and distinct perception is God, who is not a deceiver. In previous meditations Descartes proved that he is a thinking thing, he exists, but now he is still in doubt and is asked by questions like where his existence came from, where his ideas or thoughts came from, why they appear in his mind. The raising so many questions makes me think too as a reader and imbued in Descartes’ thinking. That 's why I chose this argument to clarify and explain the chain of his thoughts and how he came to the conclusion about the existence of God.
All of the philosophers that we've studied so far have made some valid arguments concerning the existence, or non-existence of God. If I had to be swayed by an opinion for God's existence, or non-existence it would have to be by William Paley's argument. Paley's analogy is strong because of his metaphor of the watch to explain the universe and the existence of an intelligent designer. The weak part of this analogy is that the watchmaker as evidence can be produced in the physical form; the universe maker as evidence cannot be produced in physical form.
For this disputation, I had the pleasure of arguing against the topic of be it resolved that you can convince a non-believer to affirm the existence of God using philosophical arguments. As the opposing side, Sarah and I counter argued the following: the argument from motion, the ontological argument, Pascal’s Wager, the cosmological argument, the teleological argument, and the moral argument. The argument from motion argues that it is only possible to experience that which exists, and people experience God, therefore God must exist; however it can be counter argued that since faith cannot be demonstrated or experienced, as it is unseen, God cannot exist.
Many philosophers have argued and defined what it means to exist in order to prove or disprove the existence of God. George Berkeley, a Irish philosophers argues for the existence of God. The existence of a great perceiver causing ideas in our minds. On the other hand, David Hume, a Scottish philosopher is a skeptic, he argues to undermine religion, critiquing that religion can have harmful consequences on society. These empiricists argue to establish or dismiss religion because it sets universal notions in which it operates as part of society’s morality.
The question of god’s existence has been at the forefront of people’s minds for the majority of known history. The reasons this question arises varies from person to person, but holds in common the human craving for knowledge. Because of this there have been many proofs which set out to prove god’s existence of which the most accessible is the ontological argument for the existence of god. The aim is to envision a god which depends on nothing else but itself for existence. The ontological argument seeks to move from the definition of god to the actualization of god’s being.
The Ontological Argument “The Ontological Argument, which was first clearly formulated in the Middle ages, proposes that one can prove the existence of God simply by analyzing the concept of God”(3). The history of the ontological argument is a long one that started with St. Anselm of Canterbury, who wanted to find a single argument for the proof that God exists. He puts forward the argument that God is defined to be ‘that-than-which-no-greater-can-be-thought’. This is an acceptable argument because many believed that “God is a perfect being and no other creatures are superior to God” (6). Attributes of Omniscience, knowing everything; Omnipotence, being able to do anything possible; and omnibenevolence, being morally perfect.
Anselm was a Greek philosopher who was born in 1033 in Aosta, Italy. He was a Benedictine abbot in France who went into self-imposed exile to protest King William II of England and he was also a disciple of Augustine and he promoted a lot of Augustine’s teachings and beliefs. Anselm held the office of archbishop of Canterbury from 1093 to 1109, because in 1109 Anselm died. After his death in 1109 he was canonized as a saint, and his feast day is on April 21. Anselm believed that it was not possible to think of absolutely nothing.
We have witnessed hierarchy from the start of civilization; it has been both our downfall and a blessing. We have had many forms of hierarchy, but when put forth it starts to crumble from those oppressed. The fourth way of Thomas Aquinas's five proofs for God's existence is degree. The degree is based that everything has order, and in result some are better off than others. There are some flaws in this proof, being equal, natural selection, and behaviors.