...Beyond Proof and Necessity: Logically Establishing God’s Existence Scott F. Davis April 29, 2013 Beyond Proof and Necessity: Logically Establishing God’s Existence Monarchs have claimed divine ascension through Him; centuries of popes have directed pilgrimages and holy crusades according to His divine wishes, and as long as mankind’s time on Earth has been in existence, brother has slayed brother in the name of one singular and all powerful God. To be certain, no telescope ever designed could reach outwards through the universe to see God’s kingdom; no microphone ever produced would be able hear the sound of God, and no camera ever invented possessed the ability to record the likeness of God--yet somehow it became inherently possible that over three billion of the earths’ population today believe in God—whether He be called Jehovah, Yahweh, Allah or the Great I Am. What remains is the time immortal question which mankind has been left to reason: Is it necessary to prove His existence? This paper serves to clearly answer the question, using logic, reason and evidence to support, that it is not necessary to prove the existence of God. Demonstrated within this paper will be the arguments of proof, or the proof of God, that is, an address of the cosmological, ontological and origination by design theories of existence, with centering on the ontological theory. Further contained will be assessments of existence as is inherently essential to evaluate...
Words: 3104 - Pages: 13
... Sheel Patel Question: Analyze and evaluate the two proofs of God’s existence that Descartes provides. Which is more successful and more relevant? Plausible alternative answers: a) Apparently, Descartes had identified more than one way to prove God’s existence. b) The existence of God is a very solid topic to debate on and to be completely sure and convincing, Descartes gives to different proofs of the existence of God. Arguments in favor of each answer: a) He may have found out the second way of God’s existence by thinking about his own existence and him being an imperfect being. b) Descartes did not want to be questioned about his views as there was or is no guaranteed proof of God’s existence. Possible objections to the arguments: a) He cannot give the proof of God’s existence because he would have known that he took birth from his mother’s womb and was not created by God. He had to have knowledge of the basic science behind it. b) Descartes could have given one, solid and an unquestionable argument for God’s existence and not two loose questionable proofs. Possible replies to the objections: a) Earlier, Descartes provided doubts for his existence itself. Therefore, he could not have completely known that he was not made by God and that there was science involved in his birth. b) Descartes thought of them to be solid and he was not questioned on his proofs. Therefore, he felt more confident providing more than one...
Words: 310 - Pages: 2
...possible to possess true knowledge. After finishing his meditations he felt he had indeed accomplished this task. However, many philosophers have found problems with his reasoning. One philosopher in particular, Antoine Arnauld, felt one of his most important proofs employed the use of circular reasoning to prove his argument. This has become known as “The Cartesian Circle”, and it has given rise to great debates over the years. This paper will set out to prove Descartes does in fact commit the error of circularity. Using foundationalism as a starting point Descartes starts with the most basic intuition anyone can have, “I think, therefore I exist”. This is a self-evident truth which is true because he clearly and distinctly perceives it, and it is impossible to doubt. Throughout the rest of his meditations he uses a series of intuitions to reason the truth of the external world. Once he has nearly proved its existence he was forced to prove God exists and God was not a deceiver in order to rid the skeptical argument of an evil demon constantly deceiving us. Eventually Descartes is able to intuit that God does exist and could not be a deceiver because God is a perfect being. Perfection implies deceptionless existence. Based on those meditations Descartes states “we are sure that what we clearly and distinctly perceive is true only because God exists.” This seems to be okay on the surface. However, Arnauld’s objection states “we can be sure that God...
Words: 1098 - Pages: 5
...Is proof for the existence of God's necessary? Monica Carter PHI 208: Ethics and Moral Reasoning Zummuna Davis October 3, 2012 When you ask a human how the universe evolved some will say that man created the universe. Next question, how can man create something in outerspace? Now the room is silent, why is that? How can you answer a question that cannot be answered. So why do you need proof that God exist, what will that prove, that people are actually worshipping God, instead of a what people say is an inanimate object. In the beginning God created the heaven and earth. And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters (Genesis 1:1-2). There are many traditional proofs for the existence of God, and we will look at three, the argument from design, the ontological argument and the cosmological argument. There are many ways that the universe might have been, it might have had different arrangement of planets and stars; it might have begun with a bigger or smaller big bang; the vast majority of these universes would not have existence of life. We are fortunate indeed to have a universe that does. The argument of design, picture looking at a rectangular skyscraper and examined the structure within it, you might think that this intricate structure was not the outcome of mere chance, but had been designed. Now look at the universe, is it possible that such...
Words: 1991 - Pages: 8
...the existence and the belief of God. The essay will explain the philosophers view points on the religion of God. There are a few arguments of which existence is the strongest. It will explain many aspects on science and religion, atheism, moral and human freedom on God’s existence. Believing in God and believing in God’s existence can have many aspects with different views from philosophers, the arguments will explain which philosopher is more compelling than the other. When it comes to the existence of God, some philosophers believe that it is necessary to have proof and some believe that proof is not necessary if we have faith. One philosopher named, Thomas Aquinas believed that God is from faith and first cause is the proof of God. Let’s take a look at what Thomas had to say, “that the existence of God is not demonstrable: that God's existence is an article of faith, and that articles of faith are not demonstrable, because the office of demonstration is to prove, but faith pertains (only) to things that are not to be proven, as is evident from the Epistle to the Hebrews, 11.” (Paul Halsall, 1988.) Therefore, I don’t believe that we need proof of God’s existence. I agree with Thomas that God is faith. No, proving God’s existence is not necessary because God is faith, we have to believe in God to have the faith, If we do not believe in God then we might try to prove him, but will not get anywhere. There are arguments on the existence of God. The ontological proof explains...
Words: 1578 - Pages: 7
...Proof of God’s Existence Charles Porter COM 200 Final Argumentative Paper Is the proof of God necessary? Proofs are used to prove, using a deductive method, that a given necessarily exists. Proof is often like geometry there are given and certain rules is used to arrive at a conclusion of why that given is true. The proof for the existence of ‘God’ has an ultimate goal to prove that God logically and ‘necessarily exists’. If the proof is successful, any rational person cannot find fault in the claim that God does exist. Within the proofs ‘god’ must necessarily exist not just contingently exist. An example of contingent existing would be a balloon is in my hand; prior to making this balloon the balloon did not exist and after the balloon pops and disintegrates it too will not exist. This balloon has contingent existence and it is not necessary. The proof that God exists must be a necessity and should be stronger than evidence that ‘God’ does exist. Something had to create the universe because it did not always exist, therefore God must exist. Many people dispute, thus saying that there is not actual proof that God does exist but that is where faith comes in the picture. Which argument for the existence of God is strongest and why? There are a few strong arguments for the existence of God. First there is the ontological argument which states that it is quite likely that a flawless being...
Words: 1739 - Pages: 7
...remarkable arguments ever set forth not just an argument for God’s existence but a purely analytic argument. Ontological argument was regarded as the most intriguing of all arguments for theism. It also regarded as family of arguments. This particular argument is also called “a priori” argument. This does not rely mainly on the facts on observable world. But , it tries to show that the existence of God comes from the very definition of God itself as the most perfect being without using facts. An “a priori” argument about God’s existence depends on how we define God. The point of this argument is very crucial because, if the Ontological Argument proves to be valid, it is not just the mere existence of God is established, but more significantly, also traditional attributes that theists believe God to have. Nonetheless, the Ontological argument has been influential that it has both earned numerous passionate critics and defender of various philosophical learning from the time it was advocated until today. One of them is Immanuel Kant who is believed to have delivered a fatal blow to the this argument by pointing out that “existence” is not the real predicate. The problem to say “God exists” does not tell us anything about God. The use of the word exist does not add anything new to our understanding of God. Another argument is also the Cosmological Argument. The cosmological argument is one that argues for the existence of God from certain properties of universe. The cosmological...
Words: 1246 - Pages: 5
...Aquinas was one of the many philosophers who tried to prove the existence of God. He created five proofs. One of them is know as the proof of motion, which states two things. First that there is potential for something at rest to move. Second, there is actual motion happening. In this proof Aquinas tries to prove God’s existence by explaining that there is a first mover who was the cause for everything to move, which is God. For example, the first mover of a set of dominos would be my finger. My finger caused every other domino to move. Just like God is the cause for something to move, which causes everything else to move. Even though the proof of motion might seem reasonable, it has two objections. The first objection argued that...
Words: 455 - Pages: 2
...is fallible because he reaches the conclusion that we should “wager” God’s existence, rather than coming up with “proof” by using deductive reasoning like Descartes provides in his argument. These early 17th century philosophers both provided writings defending the validity of the Christian religion and of God’s existence. After the Protestant Reformation of 1517, the Catholic Church’s sanctity was questioned. Different religions sprouted across Europe and citizens of Western Europe began questioning religion itself and the existence of God. Blaise Pascal and Rene Descartes each claimed to have a strong belief in Catholicism (or a denomination of), and because of this strong belief, they sought to defend the validity of the existence of God. Pascal wrote a collection of aphorisms which he started to revise into a writing he would call the “Apology of Christian Religion”. However, Pascal died before he was able to complete it. In Pascal’s Pensees (his writings were collected and organized in the 19th century and 20th century), Pascal systematically dismantles the notion that we, the people, can trust reason to validate God’s Existence. Pascal rambles on about what “we” can’t do to prove God, instead of finding his own proof of God’s existence. His approach to persuade us into believing God is to use mathematical equations and odds to reach the conclusion that it is worth it to a person to wager on God’s existence. Descartes on the other hand, uses deductive reasoning and a systematic...
Words: 316 - Pages: 2
...compromise. One well known user of this method was the scholar Thomas Aquinas. In Thomas’ book Summa Theologica, he proves that the existence of God is self-evident using this. Thomas offered The primary question that will be made an example of will be Question 2: The Existence of God. Seeing the Scholastic Method in these three articles will be an easy feat. With reading what he writes about and paying close attention to how he writes it, one can see strong elements of Scholasticism in his method of proving that God exists. Article One states the objections of the existence of knowledge, that God is “known”, as well as the existence of truth. Thomas gives these objections as examples proving that God’s existence is self-evident. He also states possible counter-examples so he may effectively counter the counter-examples with his “I answer that”. This statement of counter-examples show Scholasticism by making an agreement between two sides of the argument. Which is why he uses counter-examples as the “other side” of the argument that God’s existence is self-evident. Another form of the Scholastic Method is other books and or philosophers. Like one quote, Aquinas uses the verse Hebrews 11:1 which says “faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things unseen” in his first objection to demonstrate that knowledge of God’s existence requires some form of faith. In Article 2 Thomas Aquinas asks whether it can be demonstrated that God exists. Now this is dipping...
Words: 680 - Pages: 3
...Phil- 201 Response Paper The argument of whether or not it is possible to prove or disprove God’s existence has been going on for hundreds if not thousands of years. Many scholars, atheists, and non-believers throughout the years have argued against the existence of God, but in H.J. McCloskey’s, On Being an Atheist, he shows a much deeper look at his argument by discussing what he thinks might be the overarching argument of Gods existence. After reading McCloskey’s article I have found many weaknesses in his argument and aim to point them out to show the truthfulness of Gods existence. In order for theists to properly bring truth to this matter we must understand the background to the beliefs of the atheists. The very first problem with McCloskey’s article is that he states that the theist’s argument in favor of God’s existence does not hold any proof. He believes that our proofs do not hold any girth and there for should be done away with. McCloskey states on page 64, “To get the proof going, genuine indisputable examples of design or purpose are needed. There are no such examples, so the proof does not get going at all.” This argument is an interesting one but is disproven by some other arguments atheists might have. Many traditional approaches to different solutions use proof or the idea of it to support it. If you examine the traditional approaches you will find that proof is seen as a series of logical steps which lead to a conclusion without having any unquestionable...
Words: 1075 - Pages: 5
...Descartes’ arguments for the existence of God. The purpose of this essay will be to explore Descartes’ reasoning and proofs of God’s existence. In the third meditation, Descartes states two arguments attempting to prove God’s existence, the Trademark argument and the traditional Cosmological argument. Although his arguments are strong and relatively truthful, they do no prove the existence of God. At the start of the meditation, Descartes begins by rejecting all his beliefs, so that he would not be deceived by any misconceptions from reaching the truth. Descartes acknowledges himself as, “a thing that thinks: that is, a thing that doubts, affirms, denies, understands a few things, is ignorant of many things” He is certain that that he thinks and exists because his knowledge and ideas are both ‘clear and distinct’. Descartes proposes a general rule, “that whatever one perceives very clearly and very distinctly is true” Descartes discovers, “that he can doubt what he clearly and distinctly perceives is true led to the realization that his first immediate priority should be to remove the doubt” because, “no organized body of knowledge is possible unless the doubt is removed” The best probable way to remove the doubt is prove that God exists, that he is not a deceiver and “will always guarantee that any clear and distinct ideas that Descartes second argument for proving God’s existence is very straightforward. He has four possibilities that created his existence. Through process of elimination...
Words: 362 - Pages: 2
...of existence? Since the beginning of human existence there has always been some type of battle about faith, belief, and the existence of god. When this class first began I didn’t know what to expect due to my own personal beliefs and spiritual upbringing, but as the course went on I was open to different views and ways to look at what has been taught for years. Even today there is still the constant battle on whom and what is the true belief and god. But one thing is for sure we all strive for a common goal and that is to be in the grace of whatever Deity you believe in when your time on earth is done. The first thing that comes to question is your belief in the existence of God. For many the belief in god is a very challenging issue. There will always be an ongoing controversial discussion whether or not God exist. It is not unusual for people to say that it is impossible to prove the existence of God. This impossibility derives from the idea that if the observable phenomena is absent, therefore, it does not exist. In truth, how can one presume to observe the divine, something that exists in the heavens? Mere observation is clearly not a possibility when dealing with a transcendent being. Evidence in the existence of God is in every cause and effect. We understand that nothing happens in and of itself. Every event originates from a preceding event. Those events, if traced back, will ultimately find its foundation with God. There are many beliefs of God’s existence...
Words: 1516 - Pages: 7
...Introduction H. J. McCloskey gets most of his strong statements against the belief by asking the atheist to provide sufficient proof that God exists. However, McCloskey is not the only person who is unsure and asks questions God’s existence based on personal beliefs or influence. From the beginning many people have had questions about God and his existence. He wrote numerous books on atheism between 1960 and 1980 including the famous book, God and Evil. This paper evaluates the credibility of McCloskey’s article “On being an Atheist”. One of the McCloskey’s core arguments against theism is his demand for any proof that ascertains theists’ beliefs on God’s existence. He believed that atheism is more comforting than theism because most Christians do not believe in God because of proof but because of certain reasons and factors, he is looking for more solid evidence in God’s existence. However, there are several reasons why a person should believe in the existence of God. Firstly, theists believe that God is the creator of all things and of nature. Therefore, God is the creator of all things in existence and that affect both the atheists and theists are affected by this. The Bible also states, that Koran and other religious literatures all communicate the existence of a high power with some similar characteristics. These writings have been in existence for several years without any alteration of which both theists and atheists draw their arguments. Therefore, to some point, atheists...
Words: 1660 - Pages: 7
...other being or even question that he exists. In this article from McCloskey, he talks about God’s existence and if there truly is a God, then why is there evil in world? This essay will have my findings on the questions we were asked as class about McCloskey’s thoughts and the thoughts from the book, Philosophy of Religion. When believing in anything, people like to have proof as to why something exists. Christians might show proof in God’s existence or Atheists might show proof in that there is no God. We all have reasons as to why we believe in certain things and sometimes its can be hard to prove. McCloskey talks about proofs in his article, saying that there are proofs to the non-existence of God. In a presentation titled “Approaching the Question of God’s Existence”, the author is quite the opposite of McCloskey. He doesn’t believe that we should try proving anything; it is a word to steer away from. We shouldn’t try to find proof that God exists, but find a best explanation to why he exists. McCloskey says that proofs cannot actually make a case that there is a God. In the presentation, though, it is explained that we can make our best case for why he exists. The author says, “There are certain things we see within the universe, the best explanation is God.” (Approaching the Questions of God’s Existence) So in conclusion to the idea of proofs, no one has proof of God’s existence but we may very well have good reasons that we should believe in it. McCloskey claims that...
Words: 1416 - Pages: 6
