Like any new ideas, his ideas faced objection. As part of his process of thinking, Descartes included these objections and his responses to the objections in his works in order to better prove his position. Descartes believed that he proved the existence of a perfect being because any human can conceive what it is to be a perfect being. As Descartes said in the Meditations, “…from the mere fact that there is within me an idea of something more perfect than me, it follows that this thing really exists”(AT 52). Descartes believed that in order to have this idea of a being that is truly infinite; something must have put that idea in our mind.
On his quest for true knowledge, Descartes discovered that his senses alone failed. Descartes agreed to some degree with skeptists; that what we percieve may not be real, that he could dream of what he experiences or that something might be controlling his thoughts, but what he can not deny is that he does think. He is quoted as famously saying, "I think; therefore, I am". Although some rationalist believe that God must exist, there are many people who think rationalism leads to Atheism because you can not prove God's existance through logical positivism. The only way to determine truth or what is real, is to deduce.
Dawkins and Aquinas: Theology Whether it’s argumentative or sentimental, an author always aims to get a significant truth across to the reader. In the novel “The God Delusion,” Richard Dawkins analyzes many theories that theologians have developed about the existence of God and essentially squanders them. Through his unique sense of humor and his idea of “logic”, he gives reasons of why the theories of Thomas Aquinas, and other theories as well, are not well developed and are incorrect. Although he does raise some interesting points in his arguments, he does not address enough issues to completely reject the theories of God’s existence. God has a very broad meaning and the meaning varies from person to person.
• Jung states that we can never know whether or not God exists. We can never know if a religious experience is real or whether it is created by the mind. However, Jung accepts science which bases conclusions on empirical evidence without worrying about whether the data is a figment of a person’s imagination. If there is empirical evidence for a religious experience, why can’t we accept that it is true? • The Theory of Archetypes - Geza Roheim argues that the theory of archetypes is unnecessary.
This means truth that exists outside of bias and perspective (Doll, Lueders and Morgan, 2006). The third opposition is "an opposition between a self or consciousness that is turned outward in an effort to apprehend and attach itself to truth and true knowledge and a self or consciousness that is turned inward in the direction of its own prejudices, which, far from being transcended, continue to inform its every word and action" (HB, 1611L). Fish is stating that the third opposition is consciousness searching for truth and true knowledge (Doll, Lueders and Morgan, 2006). Each of these oppositions is attached in turn an
I chose to write my paper on J.L. Mackie and his argument titled “The Logical Problem of Evil”. His work attempts to disprove that evil, by the definition that we know, exists. He does this by analyzing the arguments, proposed by theists, that are assumed to be in support of the good and evil structure. He dismantles many of these arguments by attacking the assumption of God’s omnipotence.
The ultimate goal for Descartes in the meditations is to prove the existence of the external world. Descartes assumes that God exists and is not a deceiver. This being granted can Descartes explain the existence of a world outside of Descartes' mind? Descartes talks about the idea of a triangle being perceived by the mind and how it relates to the outside world even without the knowledge of it. Another point that Descartes makes to further defend the idea of an external world is the concept of a one thousand sided figure.
This train of thought cleverly warrants the evocation of faith, or belief without physical proof or empirical knowledge. Appropriately so, Anselm opens the chapter of Proslogion discussing Divine existence with a meditative prayer in which, he modestly supplicates such highly pertinent concepts including wisdom and faith in order to better understand the existence and character of God. With such faith and understanding, Anselm boldly asserts his beliefs about God’s nature, existence, and attributes before even finishing his central argument in an attempt to comprehend what he genuinely believes to be true about his higher power. While my own personal convictions are comparatively nowhere near as bold as that of Saint Anselm, his approach epitomizes what I believe to be an authentic and selfless demonstration of faith. Ideally, I believe that unconditional faith of this
Freud explained that the mind was divided into three areas; the ‘ID’ where our base instincts are such as desire and appetite, the ‘Ego’ a part of our mind that is shaped by external influences and the ‘Superego’ a part of the ego that is shaped by the influences that have affected our development such as parents and teachers. He believed that our conscience was the result of our social conditioning or socialisation thus all moral values are subjective. However, the argument for God is also largely supported, although the argument does not suggest that there must be a God, but rather that God is needed for morality to achieve its end. Cardinal Newman agreed with Kant that the existence of
Revelation as Dialectical Presence V. Revelation as New Awareness. Dulles explains and categorizes each one in his book. In his attempt to categorize and systematize, he does make some over generalizations that can be helpful and some that can be harmful in seeing truth and accuracy. While some models are well represented and explained, others are not as clearly explained. We will take a specific and focused look on his understanding of Revelation as Doctrine and skim over some of the strengths of the other models.