Descartes Argument For The Existence Of God
Descartes argument for the existence of God is based on two main principles. This is the principle of sufficient reasoning and the principle of adequate reality. The principle of sufficient reasoning means that everything has a cause. The principle of adequate reality is followed by sufficient reasoning and means that there must be at least as much reality in the cause as the effect. An example of having at least as much reality in the cause as the effect could be studying for a test and receiving an A. The cause is studying while the effect is earning an A. There must be as much reality in studying as there is in earning an A. Descartes understands that he exists because he is deceived and thinking. If one is thinking or there is a thought,
…show more content…
He simply states that the idea in his mind must be true because of his rule on adequate reality. It seems like Descartes proved that God exists through the understanding of himself existing. It doesn’t make sense to only compare your own existence to the existence of God. He doesn’t have too many other arguments on how or why God might exist. I think I might have agreed with his argument if he added more detail and clarity to his reasoning’s. Descartes would not be too happy if he heard what I had to say about his reasoning. I don’t think he would completely shut me down if he heard what I had to say, but rather he would continue to persuade me. He would explain the importance of the ability to reason and think. He would remind me that everything has a cause and try to break down his arguments to slowly persuade me in to agreeing with him.
David Hume divides the perceptions of the mind into ideas on one side and impressions on the other. Hume believes that impressions are livelier than ideas. A great example he gives is the idea of love. Isn’t feeling love more lively than watching a movie about two people being in love? I would agree so. Often times Ideas can be made up or nonexistent. A unicorn or monster is something that would support this …show more content…
This could mean memories, thoughts and or beliefs. Hume also demonstrates an argument for the idea of God. I personally think his argument about God worked much better than Descartes’. He says that the idea of God can be determined by the impressions we have of “wise” and “good.” When referring to how we get from one idea to another, Hume explains how it corresponds. He says that when we think about a wound, we automatically think about the pain it can cause. This is the idea of cause and affect.
Hume thinks that impressions or beliefs are more firm, lively, forcible and steady. Belief and fiction are the same concept in his mind. He argues that it is more vivid than something you’d imagine. This brings me back to the idea versus the feeling of love. Actually feeling an emotion is livelier than the idea of it. Hume explains that even ideas or thoughts are dependent on impressions. This is why he believes that our ideas are copies of our impressions. Ultimately, Hume advocates that the distinction when it comes to liveliness is
He simply states that the idea in his mind must be true because of his rule on adequate reality. It seems like Descartes proved that God exists through the understanding of himself existing. It doesn’t make sense to only compare your own existence to the existence of God. He doesn’t have too many other arguments on how or why God might exist. I think I might have agreed with his argument if he added more detail and clarity to his reasoning’s. Descartes would not be too happy if he heard what I had to say about his reasoning. I don’t think he would completely shut me down if he heard what I had to say, but rather he would continue to persuade me. He would explain the importance of the ability to reason and think. He would remind me that everything has a cause and try to break down his arguments to slowly persuade me in to agreeing with him.
David Hume divides the perceptions of the mind into ideas on one side and impressions on the other. Hume believes that impressions are livelier than ideas. A great example he gives is the idea of love. Isn’t feeling love more lively than watching a movie about two people being in love? I would agree so. Often times Ideas can be made up or nonexistent. A unicorn or monster is something that would support this …show more content…
This could mean memories, thoughts and or beliefs. Hume also demonstrates an argument for the idea of God. I personally think his argument about God worked much better than Descartes’. He says that the idea of God can be determined by the impressions we have of “wise” and “good.” When referring to how we get from one idea to another, Hume explains how it corresponds. He says that when we think about a wound, we automatically think about the pain it can cause. This is the idea of cause and affect.
Hume thinks that impressions or beliefs are more firm, lively, forcible and steady. Belief and fiction are the same concept in his mind. He argues that it is more vivid than something you’d imagine. This brings me back to the idea versus the feeling of love. Actually feeling an emotion is livelier than the idea of it. Hume explains that even ideas or thoughts are dependent on impressions. This is why he believes that our ideas are copies of our impressions. Ultimately, Hume advocates that the distinction when it comes to liveliness is