DOES DESCARTES’S SCEPTICAL PHILOSOPHY REPRESENT A MORE OR LESS ENLIGHTENED APPROACH TO THE QUESTION OF GOD THAN ANSELM’S? (Essay Sample)

DOES DESCARTES’S SCEPTICAL PHILOSOPHY REPRESENT A MORE OR LESS ENLIGHTENED APPROACH TO THE QUESTION OF GOD THAN ANSELM’S? Student’s Name Course Professor’s Name University City (State) Date Introduction People usually consider their senses as the true sources of knowledge. In reality, senses have limitations in providing absolute knowledge. Philosophers like Rene Descartes did succeed in unveiling the limitations of human senses in identifying reality. As per the views of Descartes, the fundamental source of knowledge is reason rather than the senses. He argues that reason has the ability to explain some of the confusing questions like why a creator or God is necessary for this universe. Descartes was of the view that the inputs from the senses can be better explained with the help of reasons. Senses themselves have the ability to identify true knowledge. They provide only the data or information. The data obtained from the senses should be processed or analysed properly using reasons if an individual needs to identify the truth. Descartes was a strong believer. He believed that humans have acquired the ability to understand the world since they were made in the image of God. Humans lost this ability as a consequence of sin. Descartes argues that humans can get this ability back if they concentrate hard.[Michael Green. Problems of Philosophy, (Philosophy 1, Fall 2009). p.39] [Descartes’s answer to skepticism. http://carneades.pomona.edu/2009-PoP/nts-1007.shtml#:~:text=Descartes%20used%20skepticism%20to%20displace,himself%20was%20not%20a%20skeptic. [Accessed 17 August 2022]] On the other hand, St. Anselm, the father of Scholasticism developed the ontological argument to prove the existence of God. In his opinion, God is an absolutely perfect being and it is impossible to perceive a being that is greater than God. He argues that “nothing can be greater than a being than which no greater can be conceived”. Both Descartes and Anselm tried to prove the notion that the idea of the nonexistence of God may lead to a contradiction. At the same time, Descartes’s sceptical philosophy regarding the existence of God appears like a more or less enlightened approach to the question of God compared to Anselm’s Scholasticism.[Graham Oppy. Ontological Arguments. (2019). https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ontological-arguments/#:~:text=Anselm%20claims%20to%20derive%20the,which%20exists%E2%80%94can%20be%20conceived. [Accessed 17 August 2022]] How do sceptical philosophy and Scholasticism explain the existence of God? Descartes’ argument regarding the existence of God can be summarised as follows. * God is a supremely perfect being. * Existence is perfection. * Therefore, God exists[Matthew Silverstein. Philosophy 11: Introduction to Philosophy. (2007). https://www.amherst.edu/media/view/22912/original/Descartes%2B-%2BOntological%2BArgument.pdf. [Accessed 17 August 2022] p.1] Descartes’ argument appears logical and acceptable. It is illogical to believe that everything in this universe has originated from nothing or emptiness. Science starts from singularity to explain the origin of this universe. It says that a Big Bang occurred around 13.7 billion years ago and the universe emerged from a singularity, an entity that has infinite density and gravity. The advocates of the above theory say that space and time did not exist before the Big Bang. In other words, Big Bang took place at no place and at no time. If this argument is true, one should believe that a material thing or singularity existed in no space at the beginning. If no space was available, how has the singularity exploded and expanded? How the singularity has originated? There are plenty of questions that can invalidate the Big Bang Theory.[Tereza Pultarova. What If the Big Bang Wasn't the Beginning? New Study Proposes Alternative (2017). https://www.space.com/38982-no-big-bang-bouncing-cosmology-theory.html. [Accessed 17 August 2022] p.1] [Pultarova, p.1] Science, evolutionists, and atheists are the strongest advocates of the Big Bang Theory. They question the existence of a supreme being (God) that has no origin or end. At the same time, they forget the scientific theory that believes in the existence of an energy that can neither be created nor be destroyed. If science believes in the existence of an entity (energy) that has no origin or end, why does it reject the existence of God that has no beginning and end? In short, Descartes’ argument regarding the existence of a supremely perfect being cannot be neglected by science. Although Descartes’ argument regarding the existence of a supremely perfect being appeared logical, there is something that may question the validity of this argument. Imagine the following argument * I have the idea of a supercomputer that is perfect in all respects. * Existence is perfectionism * Therefore, a supercomputer exists In the same manner, we can predict the existence of many super-beings if we trust the argument of Descartes. This argument may not be enough to prove the invalidity of Descartes’ argument regarding the existence of a perfect superbeing or an intelligent designer. It is impossible for humans to conceive a supremely perfect being with the help of the senses available to them. Human senses can identify only material things. God should be a spiritual thing rather than a material object and only a spiritual being can identify the presence of God. It should be noted that science believes in the existence of dark matter and dark energy although these things are invisible to us. It is believed that around 80% of the universe is made of dark matter and dark energy. In other words, the material things in this universe constitute only 20% of the total mass of the universe. Dark matter is responsible for the way galaxies are organized on grand scales. Dark energy, on the other hand, drives the accelerated expansion of the universe. If science believes in the existence of dark matter and dark energy that are invisible to humans, there is nothing wrong in trusting the arguments of Descartes regarding the existence of a perfect superbeing that is invisible to us.[Dark Energy and Dark Matter. https://www.cfa.harvard.edu/research/topic/dark-energy-and-dark-matter#:~:text=Dark%20matter%20makes%20up%20most,accelerated%20expansion%20of%20the%20universe. [Accessed 17 August 2022] p.1] Just like Descartes, Anselm also argued that God is ultimately beyond human comprehension. Anselm tried to answer the questions like what God is and how God acts with the help of reasons. His aim was not to study Scripture using reasoning but “to bring the enquirer to the realization that when he had done his reasoning, he would find that he arrived where faith would also take him”. Anselm’s arguments have plenty of confusing elements. For example, he argues that “God must exist, since a God who exists is greater than a God who does not”. In other words, Anselm considers God as the supreme authority in the universe. As a result, nothing can exist in a universe that is created by God. Creations can never be superior to the creator. Creator knows how to control and guide his creations. Evolutionists never accept the aforementioned argument. They believe that everything in this universe has evolved over a period that lasts billions of years. They do believe that the life form originated in a water soup after a sudden discharge of energy (probably lightning that can create an electric discharge of higher magnitude). Evolutionists believe that all life on Earth has a universal common ancestor. Thus, the ancestor of humans, as well as plants, is one and the same. Although science was able to prove microevolution, it failed to prove macroevolution. It is possible for various life forms on earth to undergo certain changes at the micro level. At the same time, it is impossible for them to undergo macroevolution. For example, the coronavirus has the ability to produce multiple variants due to mutation. However, it is not possible for this virus to get converted to another species like bacteria, animals or humans.[Evans, G.R. Anselm’s life, works, and immediate influence. (2017). https://www.cambridge.org/core. [Accessed 17 August 2022] p.11] [Eadmer, Life of St. Anselm (Vita Anselmi), ed. R. W. Southern (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1962).] [Kayla Armstead. What is an Ontological Argument? (2022). https://study.com/learn/lesson/ontological-argument-summary-analysis.html. [Accessed 17 August 2022] p.1] [Schopf, J. William; Kudryavtsev, Anatoliy B.; Czaja, Andrew D.; Tripathi, Abhishek B. Evidence of Archean life: Stromatolites and microfossils". Precambrian Research. (2007). Vol.158, No. 3–4, p. 141–155.] The basis of St. Anselm’s argument is based on the concept that humans cannot conceive of a supreme being other than God. On the other hand, Descartes bases his argument on the notion that the human soul does not die with the body. Descartes’ argument appears to be more logical and acceptable. It should be noted that energy is required for doing work as per the principles of science. If this principle is true, it is logical to argue that humans need some kind of energy for doing work. Science says that energy can neither be created nor be destroyed. God supplies the energy required for human activities. As in the case of God itself, the energy supplied by God cannot be destroyed under any circumstances. At the time of death, God’s energy or spirit detaches from the human body and joins with God. In other words, the spiritual entity of humans will return to God while the material entity stays on earth at the time of death of an individual. This argument appears more genuine compared to the arguments of evolutionists or atheists who remain silent over what happens to the soul at the time of death of a person.[René Descartes. Meditations on first philosophy. (Cambridge University Press, 2...