Zachary Davis

Philosophy
Dr. Aavatsmark
February 12, 2016
Descartes Final Paper
In Descartes's Meditations for the proof of gods existence, he follows some
rigorous steps to come to the conclusion that god does exist. Each step leads you onto
the next one, until, he has explained exactly how he eventually comes the result that
god does exist. He draws out in extreme detail his entire process to coming to that
conclusion. First, Descartes talks about being a living being, which allows him to have
thought process, and come to conclusions on his own. This ability thus permits
Descartes to pay attention to detail, and ignore all reason that will oppose his belief.
Now, I would like to move past where Descartes is on his argument, and move to the
place where he is certain of gods existence: Meditation 4.
Descartes is certain of the existence of god, which now means he can move onto
the traits and abilities god has as an omnipotent power. Truth and Falsity, is the title of
this meditation, and that fits perfectly with Descartes argument. He is able to use his
prior knowledge of himself and his abilities, to conjure up what gods likeness would be.
First, he knows god is not a deceiver, which means he could never be deceived by god,
because the act of deceiving one is of malice or non-highpower action. Quickly from
that, because god is a perfect being, he is able to create other beings. Those beings are
not all as perfect as god, because then god would not be the infinite power that he is.
He deems god responsible for his judgement, and his choices, which means his

judgement is authoritative, being a descent of god. Realizing that god is a perfect being,
he should be allowed to do anything and everything, except he does not create any
other perfect beings. Which of course leaves room for these non-ambrosial beings to
make mistakes. These mistakes are made at the hand of the judgement of the fool who
does the acts, which in theory, reaches all the way back and is dealt by the fault of god.
He controls their judgement and their ability to make choices. God is flawed in this way,
but Descartes explains that creating finite beings to make mistakes is part of the utopia
that is our world. If all beings were infinite there would be no concept of god, and things
would simply become too difficult.
To be critical of a finite being who was created by an infinite and omnipotent
being is difficult. Especially, when the task at hand is to be captious of the finite being
writing about the infinite being making choices for the finite being. We see first, early on
in the meditations there are many situations where Descartes contradicts himself,
meditation 4 not excluded. Starting off the argument, Descartes knows god exists,
which of course means he must find out what his boundaries are, or the lack thereof: for
god is an infinite being. Might Descarte just be able to assume, that once he knows
god's existence to be real that anything he does will not be done out of malice or
weakness, but out of strength and unruly ability. God is unrestrained by his powers, why
must Descartes question any of his abilities, a restricted being, being critical, of an
omnipotent being. This is the main issue I see with this meditation. However, he makes
other arguments, and allowing him to criticize or be critical of god, or the lack of his
ability to, seems to be a theme of this meditation. Descartes seems to struggle with the
concept of an infinite being. This is due to him being a finite being and having no

concept of infinity. That, is a contradiction within itself. He is certain of an infinite beings

existence, without being able to conceptualize infinity. His arguments cross over, when
he talks about deception, and having no possibility, while he himself can be mistaken.
Descartes, while his argument is extremely intricate and well thought, there are
large holes in his ideologies. After simply reading and doing a small amount of
analyzing, I was able to notice cracks in his argument, which I then was able to trace
back and formulate fully. The existence of God to me, is something that cannot be
proved, regardless of how perfect the argument is. God is a concept of belief and faith,
and I don't think that will change.