Two Arguments For the Existence of God

Descartes has to begin with his own ideas, this in a sense, is where all rationalists have to begin, Descartes is a rationalist.  Rationalists think the structure of the mind is the structure of reality and by the mind alone we can acquire knowledge.  Descartes has two arguments to rationalize the existence of God.  Descartes provides one of his arguments for the existence of God in Meditation III.  There, Descartes claims that are only three kinds of ideas, innate, adventitious, and factitious. Ideas are effects.  Because they are effects, they must have a cause.  The idea of God is an effect.  The effect cannot be greater than the cause.  The idea of God was put into us by a greater cause, God, proving that God exists.

We are born with innate ideas, adventitious ideas come from a source outside of ourselves through sensory experiences, and factitious ideas are self-produced or made up. Once you have thought of an idea, you cannot unthink it; this is the principle of natural light that Descartes speaks of.  For example, I have thought the thought of God, once I have thought it, I cannot erase it.  Now that I have thought of the idea of God, where did the idea come from? What caused it?   

In Descares’ principle of sufficient reason, he states there must be as much reality in the cause as in the effect to make something reasonable and true. The effect cannot be greater than the cause, if so, there must be another cause effecting the effect.  To illustrate this, imagine a baby on a scale. The baby weighs 10 lbs.  The scale is properly functioning and accurately reads weight.  The cause is the baby being set on the scale, and the effect is the reading of 10lbs.  Seconds later you put the baby on the scale again, and the baby now weighs 20lbs. At once one would assume that there is another cause or weight being set on the scale to result in an effect so great. It would be absurd to think otherwise.  There must be a cause equal to or greater than the effect in order to be reasonable or true.       

My ideas are the effect of any given cause; the cause of my ideas then must be greater than my ideas. Descartes proposes that the idea of God as an effect, must have a cause of equal or greater value to God. Of necessity, Descartes must define God here. God is all possible perfections; there is none greater than God.  Descartes establishes God as a “He”, characterized as perfect, immutable, infinite, eternal, omniscient, omnipotent, independent, and the creator of all things.  What is the cause of the idea of God?

Descartes argues that God is the cause of the idea of God. Remember the three types of ideas Descartes proposed, one being adventitious ideas; these are empirical, sensory, and finite in nature.  Human beings are made up of finite material, and cannot possibly understand that of the infinite world because our mind cannot apprehend that which is infinite. Our mind cannot comprehend the concept of eternity or what it is like to participate in the 4^th dimension, or beyond, for example. The idea of God is not an adventitious idea, then, it must be one of the other two types of ideas. Factitious ideas or self-produced ideas are limited in terms of apprehending or creating the idea of God, there is no possible way that one could make up the idea of a being like God, because of the nature of it.  Human rationale is limited.

By process of elimination, this leaves the last type of idea, innate ideas.  The idea of God is an innate idea humans were born with.  God is the cause of the idea of God in all of us, because of the principle of sufficient reason.  God is the cause of the idea because the effect cannot be greater than the cause. Someone or something had to put the idea of God into us, therefore, God exists, the cause of the idea.

In Descartes’ second argument for the existence of God is found in Meditation V. Descartes states the principle of clearness and distinction.  The principle of clear and distinct ideas is that if I clearly apprehend something to belong to an object, it truly does.  It does belong because you cannot think about one object without necessarily thinking about the characteristics of it.  Meaning, the characteristics truly belong to the object.  For example you cannot think of fire without necessarily thinking of its characteristics of light and heat.  Fire would cease to be fire without these necessary traits.  Light and heat in its most natural form are necessarily in association with fire. Therefore, while thinking clearly and distinctly about fire, one comes to realize that light and heat truly belong to fire, and vice versa.

When I am thinking of God, I’m thinking of the being with all possible perfections, including existence.  Existence is a perfection, existence is better than not existing.  So when you think of God, you necessarily think of an existence of God.  To say that God does not exist is a contradiction in terms. How do you know God is not a deceiver?  What is deception? Deception is a defect, an imperfection, and by definition God is perfect, so God cannot be a deceiver, otherwise it would be a contradictory claim.