Theological questioning has existed for as long as religion has but in the 1600s, it seems to have picked up fire. It was during this time that scientific study increased and discoveries that were being made went against what the church had said to be true; so, people began to question what else could be false. Meditations on First Philosophy by René Descartes discusses this topic and goes as far as outlining an argument as to why God is real. Descartes was writing at the same time of the scientific revolution and he even contributed to scientific discoveries. Therefore, it is questionable as to whether Descartes leans more towards science or religion. His ontological argument goes step by step trying to prove God’s existence, but due to its
…show more content…
His next claim states that the cause must have more reality than the effect. In other words, Descartes is trying to prove God’s existence by stating that if a person is real then its creator, God, is “more” real. The third claim is that Descartes has a “true” idea of an infinite God, which is him essentially stating that he knows what he is talking about and is a trustable source. On his fourth step, he simply affirms that he, himself, is a finite being meaning that there is an end to his existence and this is the only concrete, unquestionable …show more content…
He outlines his steps and goes through them but they are not liable nor flawless so they fail their said purpose. The lack of success and faultiness within his argument leads to the questioning of what his true motives actually are. If he was truly trying to prove that God is real he failed quite miserably since he did not even make it past the first step without faulty logic. This, however, seems intentional. For a man who contributed greatly to math and science, it is hard to believe that his argument would have as many faults as it did. He was also living in the era of science picking up momentum and credibility. It is easier to believe in something that has some sort of
His next claim states that the cause must have more reality than the effect. In other words, Descartes is trying to prove God’s existence by stating that if a person is real then its creator, God, is “more” real. The third claim is that Descartes has a “true” idea of an infinite God, which is him essentially stating that he knows what he is talking about and is a trustable source. On his fourth step, he simply affirms that he, himself, is a finite being meaning that there is an end to his existence and this is the only concrete, unquestionable …show more content…
He outlines his steps and goes through them but they are not liable nor flawless so they fail their said purpose. The lack of success and faultiness within his argument leads to the questioning of what his true motives actually are. If he was truly trying to prove that God is real he failed quite miserably since he did not even make it past the first step without faulty logic. This, however, seems intentional. For a man who contributed greatly to math and science, it is hard to believe that his argument would have as many faults as it did. He was also living in the era of science picking up momentum and credibility. It is easier to believe in something that has some sort of