Descartes and The Proof for The Existence of God

    The argument being used in this article can be found in Descartes’ Principles of Philosophy, Part I, Principle (paragraph) XIV. In this section of the Principles Descartes argues for the existence of God. In the methodological process of doubting that a mind must undergo when it philosophizes properly, the mind finds in itself a few indubitable ideas. One of these ideas it discovers is the idea of an absolutely perfect being, or God. This idea contains within it two main conceptual parts: perfection, and necessary existence. This is because the idea of perfection in our minds does not yield to non-existence. That is, in order for perfection to be truly perfect, it must first exist. Perfection that did not exist could not be perfect, because there would be nothing that exists that is perfect. This idea of perfection is also found undeniable in the mind. When pondering the idea of an eternal perfect being, the mind also discovers that such a being must exist, not only as an idea, but in actuality. This is because such a being contains in its idea perfection, and perfection contains within it necessary existence. Thus the idea of a perfect being also contains within it necessary existence, because in order for God to be perfect, it must first exist. Furthermore, to say that something is contained in the idea of anything is to say that it is true about that thing. Therefore, God exists.

However, as I hope to show, what Descartes has actually done is link the idea of an idea to the idea of a property of actuality. Descartes wants to say that the idea in the mind of a perfect being must exist because the idea of perfection includes the idea of existence. That’s fine, but making another leap from idea to actuality is not. Descartes then tries to link the idea of perfection with the characteristic of things in actuality to exist. In other words, Descartes becomes guilty of taking for granted something he himself struggles with: assigning non material qualities to material things. In this case, it’s not quite so clear-cut, because what Descartes has linked an idea (non material quality) to is not a thing, but a quality of things, namely existence. Furthermore, where existence exists as an idea in our minds and is also manifested in things outside our minds in actuality, perfection exists only in our minds, and it would be contrary to our minds to claim that it existed outside our minds. That is, we could not envision something that actually exists that is perfect. For, no matter how hard we try, we could never think of something which admits of no further improvement whatsoever. In order for something to be perfect, it must be perfect in all scenarios for ever. Reason tells the mind this is not possible. Everything that exists is imperfect in its own way. Saying that something is “perfect for its own purpose” is not a sufficient argument for positing the actual existence of perfection. Something is either perfect or not; a perfect something is not perfect some of the time in some scenarios, and according to Descartes, perfection lacks no perfection at all, and admits of no imperfections or limitations of any kind. For example, one may say “I have the perfect watch.” While the watch may be “perfect” at telling the time, it is particularly imperfect at providing fuel for a fire, or erecting a building, or stopping a moving vehicle, etc., etc. Every material thing is such, and thus nothing that exists outside the mind is perfect. So, not only is it contrary to the mind to even think of a perfect being that actually exists, such a being, as we have seen, could not possibly exist. From this it should be clear that perfection, being only an idea, is in no way connected with existence outside of the mind.