Good day everyone I am Enrique Geremia C.

Teodoro so for today I would discuss to you my part for our

report the substance of god or gods in knowledge basically in this part I would enumerate those
philosophers who has God or gods attribute and those who have no God/gods attribution in their
philosophy

Philosophers’ attribution about God

The Stoics believe that God is present in everything. Fire, or logos, or reason, fills nature with its
principle, which means that diverse sorts of substance are combined. Because God's material substance
was combined with normally unmoving matter, matter behaves the way it does because of the existence
of the principle of reason in it. Because nature has its origin in God, the Stoics named it Natural Law.

Plato's metaphor of the Divided Line has the highest level of the line, Perfect Intelligence, dealing
directly with the Forms. God utilized the Forms in the process of creating specific things, implying that
the Forms existed prior to their incarnation in things. These Forms appear to have originated in God's
thinking or the highest principle of rationality.

Socrates felt that things had an order that the intellect could uncover. This prompted him to introduce
into philosophy a method of looking at everything in the cosmos that was more completely developed
by Plato and Aristotle, namely the teleological idea of things, the belief that everything has function or
purpose.

The Unmoved Mover did not signify the same thing to Aristotle as a first mover, as if motion could be
traced back to a moment when motion began. He also did not regard the Unmoved Mover to be a
creator in the sense of subsequent theology. According to Aristotle, this Mover is not an efficient cause
in the sense of exerting a power of force or expressing a will.

For Augustine, the presence of everlasting truth entailed the existence of the Eternal Truth, which God
is. Augustine interpreted the biblical name for God given to Moses, "I Am That I Am," to signify that God
is existence itself. As such, he is the highest being, not the beingless, but something more magnificent or
sublime than which nothing exists.

Analogy is an ontological concept for Aquinas that refers to the being or nature of a thing. Its premise
assumes that what is in God is also in us. According to Aquinas, persons have varying degrees of
existence, but God is Being. The fact that we have common traits with God makes our relationship with
Him analogical. This implies we know what God knows, but not all God knows or how God knows it. We
are both like and unlike to God.

Lock – Intuitive knowledge confirms our existence, demonstrative knowledge proves God's existence,
and sensitive knowledge guarantees us those other selves and things exist, but only as we see them.
Descartes searched for his one truth, and it is in the very act of doubting. Even if God is deceiving him in
every possible way, he knows that he exists since in the very act of doubting he affirms his own
existence “I think, therefore I am” (Cogito ergo sum).

Spinoza- He does make a distinction between two aspects of Nature, using the terms natura naturans
and natura naturata to do so. By natura naturans, Spinoza means "everything that follows from the
necessity of God's nature, or of any one of God's attributes," and by naturata, he means "the things that
follow from God's own nature."

Leibniz- Only God can derive all of the predicates of every substance, and only our ignorance prevents us
from perceiving. He also applies a continuity law to his notion of substance to justify his view that each
substance unfolds its predicates in an orderly and predictable manner (from God's perspective).

Kant- We cannot establish or deny God's existence just via reason. If theoretical reason cannot
adequately cope with the reality of God, then another part of reason must be viewed as the basis of the
notion of God. As a result, the concept of God is essential. As do other regulative principles in Kant's
philosophy.

No attribution about God

Skeptics were encouraged to postpone judgment and refrain from denying or confirming anything to
acquire a quiet and undisturbed mental state.

Democritus - He was a passionate materialist who thought that natural principles regulated the entire
universe. Democritus believed that thinking could be described in the same manner that every other
event could, namely as atom movement. When the eye perceives anything, it sees an effluence or the
shedding of atoms by the item that forms an image.

Bacon - Idols have corrupted human understanding. Bacon mentions four idols. which he refers to as the
Tribe's Idols, the Cave, the Market Place, and the Theatre. These Idols, or "false phantoms," are mental
distortions, like how light beams reflected from an uneven mirror are distorted: "For from the nature of
a clear and equal glass, wherein the beams of things should reflect according to their true incidence, it is
rather like an enchanted glass, full of superstition and imposture."

Hobbes- The sovereign has the exclusive authority to decide what is best for the people's protection. If
the masses disagree with him, they will go back to the old ways. anarchy. If the sovereign does unjust
deeds, it is between the sovereign and God, not between the population and the sovereign. Hobbes
pushed his logic of anarchy and chaos because he dreaded them so much. Obeyance to the point of
subjugating religion and the church to the state Hobbes offered no consolation to the Christian who
believed that the sovereign's mandate contradicted God's law but argued that if such a person could not
follow the sovereign, he must "go to Christ in martyrdom."
Hume argues that an orderly universe does not necessarily prove the existence of God. Those who hold
the opposing view claim that God is the creator of the universe and the source of the order and purpose
we observe in it, which resembles the order and purpose we ourselves create. Therefore, God, as
creator of the universe, must possess intelligence similar, though superior to ours. Hume explains that
for this argument to hold up, it must be true that order and purpose appear only as a direct result of
design. He points out that we can observe order in many mindless processes, such as generation and
vegetation. Hume further argues that even if we accept that the universe has a design, we cannot know
anything about the designer. God could be morally ambiguous, unintelligent, or even mortal. The design
argument does not prove the existence of God in the way we conceive him: all-knowing, all-powerful,
and entirely beneficent. The existence of evil, Hume holds, proves that if God exists, God cannot fit
these criteria. The presence of evil suggests God is either all-powerful but not completely good or he is
well-meaning but unable to destroy evil, and so not all-powerful.