This means that even thought descartes can not see God he still believe in him, and anything that have anything evil like actions who knows it did not come from God. So in the end Descartes arguments may appear convincing but with the propers resources and plenty of research this leaves Descartes problem of error
While Christianity perceives God as a being that is constantly interacting in the lives of every single living thing on the earth; Deism sees God to be like a Clockmaker. God creates the things we perceive as reality, but he isn 't constantly interfering. They believe that he pays it no mind, besides checking to make sure it is still running every once in a while. This idea coincided with the focus on individualism, and allowed
One of the weaknesses of the Aquinas argument is that Aquinas contradicts himself when he rejects the possibility that the universe is unlimited. Then he argues that God has no end. It also states that everything is conditional, but God is unconditional. (Aquinas
Here now is my final conclusion: Fear God and obey his commands, for this is everyone’s duty,” (NLT). Essentially, nothing in this life except for God will truly give people joy. Oblivious to the fact that the human race has, in fact, been ordained to serve the Lord, most people’s “purpose” revolves around themselves and their
Another strong strength is that emphasis is laid on individual’s own experience and viewpoints. Looking at the major weaknesses of existentialism, it can be pointed out that it is based on philosophical concepts that are not practical and are somehow vague. Because of this, it is not empirical in nature, and it is non scientific and hard to confirm with science. Therefore it is problematic to many people as they believe that it is impossible to know how true or how well its works if it is not scientifically proven. I found it appealing when Sartre mentioned that there is “no proof of souls or spirits or ghosts or deities and thus their existence is nothing other than what people make a decision to believe”Pecorino (2000).
Are there only truly one God? There are other beliefs in different cultures and countries. So, this argument seems unreasonable for people who never fully understand the bible. So how about people who do not understand the concept of God or spirit? There are lots of people in the world that does not acknowledge God or spirit, so without knowing God, Berkeley is saying that people who do not believe in God does not exist.
However, this is not seen as a solid basis upon which absolute doubt, required by Descartes, can be built. Ironically, his skepticism offers such that I am in a state of doubt, I will also have doubt about the possibility that there could even be a deceiving being. As such, my doubt about the possibility of such a being serves to undermine the greater doubt that is supposed to be generated by this being. In order for the evil demon to generate such a degree of doubt it must be possible for it to exist. However, Descartes does not provide enough proof for his claim of its possibility.
It does not make any religious claim nor theological claim. Christian experience of God existing in threefold form is a topic of high philosophical interest. In a broader perspective, there seems to have two extreme approaches towards the Trinity: neglecting the trinity arguing that it is self contradictory doctrine (as a result rejection) and avoiding any rational understanding of it stating that it is a mystery
This mystical experience has weakness and strengths to prove the existence of supernatural being of God, such as: Mystical experience that belongs to someone cannot be explained by logic. This weakness becomes famous discussion among philosophers. Mystical experience sometimes happens to someone trough the dream or some another unexplained events in his life. Why is this unexplainable by logic? Because, according to David Hume, it against the laws of nature.
Or is it because as T.S. Eliot says, "Humankind cannot bear very much reality," that we cling to our illusions even if they contradict the obvious? To assert that everything is an illusion poses a problem. If everything is an illusion, why bother trying, improving or aspiring? Since none of what you experience, see or feel is real anyway, then who or what exists?