This paper discusses the philosopher George Berkeley's concept of immaterialism, his subsequent argument for the existence of God, and the reasons why his argument cannot be accepted as being valid.
Abstract An intricate discussion of philosopher George Berkeley's concept of immaterialism and his subsequent argument for the necessary existence of a Supreme Being, or God. The author outlines and analyzes Berkeley's two major philosophical treatises, and the main arguments found in each are clearly defined and presented in a succinct, yet detailed manner. Philosophical ideas/concepts discussed include the "Likeness Principle" and the variability of sensory experience. The paper then presents Berkeley's argument for the existence of God, which builds upon the already established theory of immaterialism by discussing the distinction between absolute and relative existence.
From the Paper "Immaterialism, as defined by Berkeley, is the idea that it is impossible for any sensible qualities whatsoever to exist independent of a mind (Berkeley 1965, 5-6). This argument is brought forth succinctly and clearly in the Dialogues, in which Berkeley presents his case through the character of Philonous, and defends it against criticism by the character of Hylas. Although there are many aspects in both Principles and the Dialogues that contribute to the overall argument for immaterialism, for the purpose of this essay, only two of the strongest points will be discussed- the argument from variability and the likeness principle.
One of the key features of Berkeley's argument for immaterialism centers on the variability of one's sensory experiences in comparison to another?s. He notes that each individual perceives the world differently, whether in terms of smell, taste, sight, or touch. One of the ways in which this variability of sensory experiences is presented by Philonous to Hylas is during a discussion between the two concerning taste. Philonous points out that although a certain food may taste pleasant to one person, that same food may taste awful to another. "How could this be", Philonous asks Hylas, "if taste was something really inherent in the food"? (Berkeley 1998, [180]) There is only apparent taste, and this requires dependence on a mind. The same argument is also applied to smell, touch, sight, extension, motion, and solidity, and is reasoned to be just as effective. Perceptual variability occurs with these senses/qualities as well, and none of the apparent smells or colors seem to be any more real than any other ([68-78])."
A discussion on one of the most famous and debated arguments for the existence of God presented by an 11th century philosopher, theologian and church leader, Saint Anselm (1033-1109).
Abstract The following paper argues that the "ontological" argument for the existence of God is one of the weakest proofs for the existence of God. This paper describes the argument in some detail, analyzes its pros and cons and arrives at a logical conclusion.
From the Paper "Immanuel Kant, the famous 18th century philosopher objected to the ontological argument for the existence of God by arguing, ?being is not a real predicate.? In simpler words Kant argued that "existence" is not an attribute of an object like temperature, shape, size etc.; hence existence cannot be associated with the definition of an object. He has objected to attributing existence to the definition of an object because by doing so, we could prove anything exists by this method. Therefore the existence or non-existence of God cannot have anything to do with the definition of God.While focusing on the weaknesses of the Anselm's ontological proof we must not totally disregard the counter-arguments of its supporters. It would, therefore, be appropriate to mention that other philosophers have argued that there are senses in which "existence" is a predicate and Kant's argument that "existence is not a predicate" cannot be taken for granted."
Abstract A paper discussing the existence of God. The author uses the philosophical views of Descartes and Aquinas to prove that God exists. The author discusses the works of the two philosophers.
From the Paper "God's existence can be proved both by reason or philosophy, and by faith or sacred doctrine. Both Aquinas and Descartes agree on the fact that God's existence can be proved, despite the fact that Aquinas believed that it is more of a question of faith, and Descartes believed that it is more important to use reasoning. Nevertheless, both agree with Aquinas? five ways that one can prove the existence of God. After all of this evidence, it is up to the individual to determine whether or not it is concrete evidence that should be followed. There should be enough evidence for each individual to determine for himself or herself about the existence of God and whether it is relevant in their lives."
An analysis and critique of the first argument Descartes presents to prove God's existence in the Third Meditation of his "Meditations on First Philosophy".
2,415 words (approx. 9.7 pages), 0 sources, 2002, $ 73.95
Abstract This paper critically analyzes Descartes attempt at proving God exists in the Third Meditation of his "Meditations on First Philosophy". After thoroughly explaining how the argument unfolds in the original text, the writer offers two lines of objections that undercut his proof which focus on his claim that he has a "clear and distinct" idea of God and the relationship Descartes claims exists between the objective reality of an idea and the formal reality of the thing represented by that idea. (It also clearly defines all of these terms.)
From the Paper "In the Third Meditation of his Meditations on First Philosophy, Rene Descartes presents his first proof of God's existence by characterizing the nature of ideas, examining the relationship between causes and effects, and defining the relationships between ideas and the things or concepts they represent. He then applies these results to the clear and distinct idea of God he claims to have. Descartes systematically defines each of these components to build the premises for his argument in such a way that the conclusion that God exists immediately and obviously follows. As such, if one is going to deny that Descartes has irrefutably proved God's existence, one must find fault in at least one of these premises. This will be the strategy that I will employ in this paper. After laying out the premises of Descartes' first proof of God's existence and the justification he employs for each one, I will argue that his argument ultimately fails because he does not sufficient justify two of the most important premises. First, I will argue that he does not - and perhaps cannot - sufficiently prove that he really has a "clear and distinct" idea of a perfect God. Second, I will argue that he does not properly justify his claim that there is a direct relationship between the objective reality of an idea and the formal reality of the thing that causes the idea."
Abstract The paper argues in favour of the proper meaning of George Berkeley's immaterialism against all the detractors who stubbornly misconstrue his meaning. The paper follows the argument as it proceeds in the publication "Three Dialogues between Hylas and Philonous, in Opposition to Sceptics and Atheists". According to the paper, Hylas [Locke], shown to be harbouring the popular misconception about immaterialism, begins by accusing Philonous [Berkeley] of denying the existence of matter. But Philonous, in the end, is able to turn the argument and show that, not only is he not a sceptic, but in turn that Hylas himself, by upholding the materialistic point of view, is guilty of scepticism.
From the Paper "Hylas had first of all made out Philonous to be a rank sceptic. But the epic drawn out argument eventually turns the tables and shows Hylas himself to be despairing of knowledge while Philonous is serene with conviction. The argument follows the very same steps of Descartes', one by one dispatching each and every notion regarding the material substance as having no separate existence apart from in the mind. This is the bulk of the dialogue, as Hylas is stubborn to the extreme, taking up every possible aspect, sometimes the same repeatedly in desperation. The secondary qualities - e.g. taste, smell, colour - are summarily dealt with. The primary qualities - e.g. extension, motion, momentum - make for the true battleground. These were the qualities annexed by Newton to built his elaborate and universal system of mechanics, that which stood for absolute knowledge in the minds of those versed in it. Thus it would not be easy to dismiss the quality of extension as mere idea for Hylas, well-versed in Newton. "
Abstract This paper discusses philosophical arguments concerning the existence of God and the exact nature of this existence. The paper first looks at John Hicks' argument for the probability of God's existence and then summarizes some of the arguments for and against the existence of God. The paper concludes that the world today has opened not only scientific and technological possibilities, but also an opportunity to more scientifically argue for the existence of God. This provides the modern believer with an exciting array of tools for the fortification of his or her faith.
Table of Contents:
The Probability of God
Arguments for the Existence of God
Arguments Against the Existence of God
From the Paper "Furthermore, one could argue that religious diversity does in fact do nothing to disprove the existence of God himself, but rather the existence of a homogeneous human society. It could be argued that God has revealed himself in different ways to different societies in order to appeal to the specific nature of the society concerned. Hence religious tolerance is legitimized, while each society is free to worship God as they please. In this way, religious diversity exactly suggests that God does exist rather than the opposite."
Abstract This paper explains that, according to astrophysicists, society may never have a way of accessing any information about anything that occurred prior to the first milliseconds after the Big Bang; therefore, the truth of whether or not any God or Creator is responsible for the existence of the universe and life may never be known for lack of necessary data. However, the author continues, many 20th century philosophers believe that the harmony of nature proves the existence of a creator. Nonetheless, presently, the paper underscores, there is simply no logically sound argument to suggest that the existence of any God or Creator is even one iota more likely than not to be true.
Table of Contents:
Introduction
Analyzing the Issue Is Impossible because it Lies Outside the Realm of Human Intellect
The Mere Fact that We Exist Is Proof that a Creator Exists and the Inability to Explain Spontaneous Creation Proves that a Creator Is Necessary
Increasing Complexity Violates the Second Law of Thermodynamics
The Universe Could Not Have Come into Existence from Nothing
The Harmony of Nature Proves the Existence of a Creator
Conclusion
From the Paper "Answering the question by reference to a God or Creator simply raises the exact same logical problems about the Creator: (1) if the self-creation of the universe is impossible, a self- created God is equally impossible; if spontaneous origin of the universe is impossible, a spontaneously originating Creator is equally impossible; and if the reality of the mechanism behind the origin of God is too complex to understand, it does not in any way explain or solve the perplexing problem about the existence of the universe."
Tags: thermodynamics, cultural definitions, system self-creation, logical
principles
Abstract People have debated the existence of God for centuries. The paper examines theories by St. Anselm and St. Thomas Aquinas who offered compelling arguments for the existence of God. It examines the opinions of critics who contend that their arguments and others are flawed and insufficient. They also state that the burden of proof rests with the believers because there is no indisputable indication of God's existence that cannot be explained by other means.
Table of Contents
Introduction
The Case for God's Existence St Anselm
St. Thomas Aquinas
Other Arguments
The Case Against the Existence of God
My Assessment
Conclusion
Bibliography
From the Paper "The debate about the existence of God is not just a religious and scientific debate. Scientists have weighed in on the subject as well. Some of their arguments reflect the reasoning of St. Anselm and St. Thomas Aquinas, but from different perspectives. Bradley notes that the properties of the universe can be described in a few set laws, such as Maxwell's Equations, Einstein's Theories of Relativity, and Newton's Laws of Motion. The universe must have been made by design. Consider that if the strong nuclear force that binds the nucleus of atoms was only five percent weaker, the only stable element would be hydrogen. If these forces were just two percent stronger, the elements that support life would not exist. Furthermore, if the electromagnetic forces were to vary only slightly, the universe would be radically different. For example, there would be little carbon, a necessary component of life. The universe has to be just so to support life. Only a very specific set of conditions make our existence possible. It is extremely unlikely that all of these things would happen without design. Therefore, since the evidence of design is overwhelming, there must have been a designer. The designer was God (Bradley)."
Abstract What is existence? This essay categorizes existence, with reference to the conceptions of reality made by Aristotle and Sartre. The paper asks if existence of something unknowable is possible? Is metaphysics a legitimate enterprise based on an authentic order to the world? The paer shows that existence is to be examined as whole and all encompassing, and that reality and non-reality are necessary components for experience.
From the Paper "When we consider our experience, and the "place" in which it occupies, many questions come to mind. What is this experience? Is what I experience all that exists? Do things out there exist? Why does this exist? And so on. It is my contention that all of these questions, and many others of a similar nature are all related in a fundamental way to the question of infinity. Naturally enough, when we think of infinity, we think of it pertaining to something, as a property of something. It is this question of whether a thing is finite or infinite that comes before all others, even whether it has the "property" of existence. This is due to the fact that finity and infinity define two possible values of existence. Finite existences have a subset of properties that establish its nature. Infinite existences, or possible existences, also have another subset of properties that establish its nature. It is my further contention that infinity represents an ultimate logical impossibility in the establishment of existence, and threatens the "wholeness" that establishes a reality. With that in mind, we can rule out the subset of properties associated with infinite existences, as they turn out to be the very properties of non-existence, which, as I will show, if a fundamental aspect to a reality itself. In short, this essay will systematize reality from non-reality, existence from non-existence using the notion of absolute finitude as a touchstone."
Abstract This paper examines St. Anselm of Canterbury's and Thomas Aquinas' attempts to prove the existence of God. The paper examines the arguments of both theologians and explains that, while their methods of proving the existence of God are very different, their arguments have endured and influenced Christian thought through the centuries. The paper also looks at the weaknesses in both men's theories and concludes with the assertion that the major weakness of both theories is that they prove the existence of God but not the existence of the God of the Bible and that in order to believe in the Christian God, divine revelation is needed.
Table of Contents
Introduction
Anselm's Arguments
Argument from Goodness
Argument from Existence Ontological Argument
Aquinas' Arguments
Argument from Motion
Argument from Efficient Cause
St. Aquinas on St. Anselm
Problems with Anselm
Problems with Aquinas
Conclusion
From the Paper "Anselm (1033 - 1109), would be considered in today's terms a theologian/philosopher. Anselm is most famous for his writings on; "Why God Became Man", his "satisfaction" theory of the atonement, and the "ontological argument." (His satisfaction theory effectively refuted early medieval notions of the devil's "rights" over fallen humankind. The satisfaction theory shaped nearly all Catholic and Protestant thought on redemptive theology, and is still prevalent at the date of this paper. (Evangelical dictionary of theology)). Anselm attempted to prove the existence of God via a much-debated theory known as the "ontological argument", which will be considered in further detail below."
This paper critically analyzes George Berkeley's first argument against the existence of matter presented in "A Treatise Concerning the Principles of Human Knowledge."
2,220 words (approx. 8.9 pages), 0 sources, 2002, $ 68.95
Abstract In this paper, the writer critically examines Berkeley's first line of argument against the existence of matter that he presents in "A Treatise Concerning the Principles of Human Knowledge". This argument is frequently called "the Perception Argument" and is his first attempt to more firmly establish his central thesis of existence being tied into perception. The paper thoroughly explains the argument and presents Berkeley's responses to the most immediate objections that come up to it (the objections that are actually addressed in the text of his treatise). The writer also examines briefly how Berkeley's argument serves to contradict arguments regarding material substance made by Locke in "An Essay Concerning Human Understanding". The paper then offers a more robust objection to Berkeley's Perception Argument that attacks some key assumptions that the argument clearly relies on, specifically those regarding relationships between matter and ideas that Berkeley clearly assumes do not exist. The objection is furthered by examining the sections where Berkeley assumes that matter does exist in an attempt to show that such an assumption involves manifest contradictions.
From the Paper " Over the course of reading A Treatise Concerning the Principles of Human Knowledge, it becomes evident that Berkeley is not so much trying to convince the reader of a certain opinion of the nature of the world and our perception of it as much as he is trying to present his actual, everyday perception of the world and his existence in it. Berkeley repeatedly says things like, "Some truths there are so near and obvious to the mind, that a man need only open his eyes to see them," (?6) that suggest the intuitive obviousness that he sees in his doctrine. Frequently, a tone of frustration comes through in his writing - especially in the sections dealing with possible objections to his theory (?34-84) - illustrative of the difficulty he must have been feeling in trying to get everyone else to see what was so damn obvious to him. As such, many of Berkeley's arguments in support of his particular fundamental beliefs seem to be afterthoughts of their respective conclusions. His vision of the nature of existence being grounded in "esse is percipi" (?3) is so strong that he does not always seem to be too concerned with the particular logic behind his supporting arguments. This is especially true when it comes to his arguments denying the existence of matter. In this paper, I will argue that, while Berkeley's conclusion regarding the non-existence of matter is quite profound, his actual arguments for this conclusion do not sufficiently verify it. To do this, I will examine the first argument Berkeley makes against the existence of matter, the so-called "Perception Argument." I will argue that this argument relies heavily on a fallacious line of reasoning about the nature of matter and the inability of matter to cause ideas in us. I will then examine several passages in Principles that support the idea that Berkeley's belief that matter does not exist is grounded largely in his - or anyone else's - inability to really define what matter is. "
Abstract The existence or non-existence of God forms a very central basis to the philosophies of some thinkers. This paper examines the philosophies of Descartes, Kant and Sartre in order to determine the significance and connection of belief in existence and non-existence of God with their respective philosophies.
From the Paper "The existence of God is central to the philosophies presented by Descartes in the sense that he can explain away the questions that do not have simple answers with the existence of God. As a result, he does not have to provide absolute logic for questions whose answers might be out of human grasp anyway; instead he focuses on the intangible proof to state that God does exist. By asserting this as an unchangeable truth, Descartes proceeds to convey his entire philosophy. Kant, however takes a slightly different route but the notion that assumption of God's existence is necessary, plays an important role in his philosophy as well. Since Kant was a devout moralist, going so far as to preach accommodating morality within political conduct, existence of God is a central necessity to his philosophies. Since Kant believed that morality ultimately leads to religion, his entire philosophy of morality would fall apart if God was left out of the equation. Hence it can be stated that existence of God was necessary to philosophies presented by Kant. In direct contrast to these two philosophers, Sartre claimed that there was no such being as God or that God did not exist. Again such a claim was central to Sartre's philosophies since he proceeded to develop them on this one notion. Sartre, known as an atheist existentialist, believed that God was dead; as a result he proceeded to form his philosophies using this basis. Sartre formed his philosophies regarding the human condition in a world that did not have an overseer who could have otherwise provided basis and structure for the world patterns. Therefore non-existence of God was crucial to the philosophies of Sartre because he attempted to form them keeping God out of the equation (Levine, 1998)."
Abstract By discussing the beliefs, works and philosophies of Saint Anselm and Descartes, this report attempts to prove that God exists. Descartes has been credited with one of the most interesting but also one of the least understood arguments in regard to the existence of God. Fascination with his argument comes from the fact that his effort to prove God's existence was a very simple premise. The paper shows that Saint Anselm's goal was to prove the existence of God with logical and philosophical understanding which, in modern times, has often been interpreted as an attempt to replace the 'faith' side of the argument.
From the Paper "Saint Anselm defined God by first saying that there could be nothing greater than God. Saint Anselm used the argument that all things in existence existed through one thing and that every existing thing exists either through something or through nothing. Since nothing can exist through nothing, everything must exists through something. That something was God. "Thus Christian philosophy for Anselm does not mean a dialectical process which begins with everyday, external and common-sense things, whose reality is accepted at their face value by all mankind, and then proceeds to demonstrate certain less evident, or perhaps even entirely unknown, truths..."
Abstract This paper supports Mackie's position that the traditional Judeo/Christian/Muslim God cannot possibly exist given the evidence of the existence of evil, since God is omnipotent, omniscient and most importantly, Good. The writer maintains that if God did exist and was as described, then evil could not possibly exist because God would do everything - could, in fact - to prevent it, yet evil abounds.
From the Paper "The question of whether or not God, in the Judeo-Christian and Islamic tradition, exists is as old as the religions themselves, and has been answered many times in many different ways. God is said to be omniscient and omnipotent, yet Evil still exists in the world. According to J.L. Mackie and other philosophers, this trilemma is irreconcilable, and therefore God must not exist. It is the writer's argument that Evil does exist, therefore God cannot exist if the statements regarding the power and knowledge of God are true. It is important to establish meanings of the words God and Evil for the purposes of this discussion. The definition of God given by the American Heritage Dictionary will suffice: "a. A being conceived as the perfect, omnipotent, omniscient originator and ruler of the universe, the principal object of faith and worship in monotheistic religions"."
Abstract The paper examines how the argument for the existence of God has been around since the beginning of man. The paper explores how different generations, cultures, and nations have conceptualized a being greater than anything else. The paper further examines the various arguments brought forth to prove or disprove the existence of this being. The paper analyzes various arguments that use logic, mathematics, and the universe in order to prove God's existence. The paper discusses the popular arguments and how effective they are in proving God's existence.
Outline:
Introduction
Principles:
1.Plato/St. Thomas Aquinas - the Cosmological Argument
2.Rene Descartes/St. Anselm - Ontological Argument
3.Friedrich Nietzsche - Atheism/Existentialism/Nihilism
Personal Views
Historical Views
Conclusion
From the Paper "These options show that going to heaven is better than oblivion, and that oblivion is better than eternal torment. Therefore, the best option is to believe in God. This argument is supposed to be a last resort for converting non-believers by scaring them with the possibility of going to hell. However, the argument is flawed because it made certain assumptions that are still controversial such as the idea that God rewards believers (what if God is indifferent?) and that God is a Christian God (if there are other gods, then there might be other possibilities of going to heaven other than the options above)."
