Philosophical Arguments on the Existence of God
Connections to Other Philosophical Positions
This topic can be positively related to all those thinkers who have argued that the rational demonstration of God’s existence is possible. Notable among these are Augustine of Hippo, Anselm of Canterbury, and Descartes. Among those who believe it is impossible to highlight are Hume and Kant.
The Proof of God’s Existence in Augustine of Hippo
The proof of the existence of God in Augustine of Hippo does not adopt the strict and rigorous proof, as would later become common from the Middle Ages onward. In his philosophy and theology, reason and faith come together. Faith illuminates reason (“I think to understand”), and reason helps to clarify the contents of faith (“I mean to believe”). The evidence he provides are steps in the search for God by the soul. The most important and preferred test is Augustine’s noological test, derived from thought. Man finds in the acts of his life—in thinking, in willing, in sensing—eternal truths, immutable and necessary. As much as they are ignored or despised, those truths will remain unchanged. They are true above the mind, and the mind has to bow to them. In the same way that the foundation of human fantasy is in the mutable nature of our mind, and the basis of the impressions that come to us through the senses is in corporeal objects, so too is the basis of these eternal truths. Truth is in itself, reflecting the necessity and immutability of God. Augustine adds three additional tests to this one. The first is based on universal consent (all but those of depraved nature confess that God is the author of the world). The second is based on individual conscience (when we look inside ourselves, we discover the presence of God). The third is based on the corporeal world, in effect, God’s creation.
Anselm of Canterbury’s Ontological Argument
Anselm of Canterbury developed a number of tests in his work Monologion. However, given the difficulties they presented, he developed a final one in another work, Proslogium, which would form the classic version of the ontological argument. It is an a priori argument that starts from the idea of God to establish His existence. The argument goes: “God is, even for a fool that denies it, that greater than which cannot be thought. But that greater than which cannot be thought not only exists in the mind but also in reality. Otherwise, we could always think of a being greater, that existed in the mind and in reality. Therefore, God exists.” This argument was criticized by Thomas Aquinas because it makes an illegal transition from thought to reality.
Descartes’ Arguments in the *Discourse on Method*
Descartes, in the Discourse on Method, made three arguments. The first is based on the causality of the idea of God in my mind. The second is complementary to the first and is based on the recognition of the existence of the imperfect. The third is the ontological argument, but taking mathematical truths as a starting point. The first argument starts with the existence in my mind of the idea of a perfect being. That idea does not come from experience; it is not an adventitious idea because experience only gives me imperfect beings, and perfection cannot be derived from the imperfect. Nor is it necessary for myself; it is not a factitious idea because, as I am an imperfect being, I cannot produce the idea of a perfect being. Therefore, that idea has been put into my mind by God. The second argument is more complex. Descartes goes on to say that I have the idea of perfections that I do not possess. And if I know I do not possess them, it is because I have the power to recognize them. And if I cannot recognize them, nor do I have the power to produce myself. And if I cannot produce myself, I have no power to keep myself. It follows that another keeps me: God. The ontological argument takes mathematical truths as a starting point. The certainty of those truths is based on evidence. However, rather than analyzing them, there is nothing in them that assures me of the existence of objects that mathematicians speak of, like triangles, spheres, etc. In contrast, when considering the idea of a Perfect Being, I find that existence is included in that idea with the same need as a mathematical proof. Therefore, God exists.
Hume’s Argument from the Order of Nature
Hume simply considers a single argument, which refers to the order of nature. If there is order in nature, there must have been someone who ordered it. It is an argument from effects to causes. Hume says it is invalid because the subject (God) is beyond the scope of human experience.
Kant’s Critique of the Proofs of God’s Existence
Kant denies that it is theoretically possible to prove the existence of God. In his Critique of Pure Reason, he reduces all arguments to three: the physico-theological argument, the cosmological argument, and the ontological argument. The validity of the first depends on the validity of the second, and the second on the third. But as the third, the ontological, is invalid, the other two are also disabled. The ontological argument is formulated as follows: “In the concept of a perfect being, existence is included because otherwise it would not be the most perfect. Therefore, if a being is possible, then this being necessarily exists.” Kant refutes the argument by saying that existence is not a predicate.