Thoughts on Descartes’ Meditation Iii – on God’s Existence

317 Words2 Pages
Thoughts on Descartes’ Meditation III – On God’s Existence Descartes describes God as eternal, infinite, omniscient, omnipotent, and creator of all things other than himself. He supports his claim of God’s existence with following arguments: 1. Something cannot come from nothing. What is more perfect cannot come from what is less perfect. 2. The ideas in me like images which may fall short of that they derive from but they cannot contain anything greater than them. 3. My ideas include one which presents God, others which present physical objects, others which present animals, and finally others which present men like me. 5. By “God” I mean infinite substance, independent, supremely intelligent, and supremely powerful – the thing from which I and everything else that may exist get our existence. The more I consider these attributes, the less it seems that they could have come from me alone, and I must conclude that God necessarily exists. Descartes’ ground for his argument is that something cannot come from nothing. He also states that cause/source must be greater than the effect/idea. He has an idea of God. Since God is supreme and perfect in every meaning, the cause of Descartes’ idea of God should be God himself. Therefore God necessarily exists. My objection is if something cannot come from nothing, then God also must come from something. If God comes from something, there should be a beginning to his existence. If there is a beginning to his existence, God cannot be eternal or infinite. Since he cannot know what happened before his existence, he cannot be omniscient. Since he cannot have created himself or caused to his existence, he cannot be omnipotent. In other words, if God is eternal, infinite, omnipotent and omniscient we can assume that something can come from nothing. Therefore I conclude that Descartes ground conflicts with his
Open Document