This raises several questions, however. For instance, is it acceptable that a person only deceives another if he is weak or malicious? or, can a person not deceive another person even if he is more powerful, and/or even if she is not being malicious? Cannot it not be that there exists a more powerful, and non-malicious, deceiver?
So basically, for Descartes, God is an entity that cannot lack in anything; and as deceiving means to lack certain positive qualities, he cannot possibly be a deceiver as he does not lack.
This viewpoint dovetails nicely with Plato's republic and the Cave allegory in that it presents a very black-and-white depiction of God and God's abilities, virtues and perfection.
That is why Descartes is unique: He paints for us a simple view of God in some ways.
The Counter-Point
One may argue against Descartes on the idea that evil may well be a quality in itself, as opposed to simply the lack of the quality of goodness.
Basically, the argument here is that negative space - in its lack of foundation and being - actually constitutes space. Perhaps evil is actually a quality, and since God has every quality - not just those we ignorantly assume are positive - he is evil...
Descartes If a person were to take a can of Red Pop, and another can of 7 Up, and pour these two similar liquids into a common container, the outcome would be a homogeneous mixture of sweet, sparkly red soda. However, if the mixture of the two sodas was looked at as a process, and photographed with high speed photographic equipment, the record would capture the different stages of the mixing
DESCARTES' BELIEVE IN GOD Descartes Believe in God Descartes' Believe in God Science attempts to prove how God did or does things. The assessment is heavily disputed by archaic religious doctrines. The traditional conflict between science and religion is entirely based on the dominion and not what is right or wrong. Rene Descartes' belief in God is not based on atheistic principles, but on blasphemy as seen from the way he investigates God's
Some of the reason for error, therefore, is not related to indifference or for not having enough time to fully consider some matter. Some of it is due to man's propensity to flaw, and to his limited ability (which is related to his limited mental and physical power). In addition to misinterpreting the nature of the relationship between intellect and free will, Descartes has incorrectly interpreted some of the most
Descartes argues that the mind and the body must be two different things since he knows the mind exists but knows no such thing about the body. Spell out this argument. What's wrong with it, if anything? Give a counterexample to the principle implied here. Are other philosophers that we have read drawing conclusions about what the mind must be like based on what we know about the mind or how
Descartes' Major Tenets Descartes Major Tenets Descartes was one of the most well-respected thinkers of his time, and he applied his special brand of logic to a wide-variety of disciplines, most notably mathematics and philosophy. The Cartesian approach to philosophy, like many approaches to philosophy, looked at the interaction of the mind and the brain. Were the mind and the brain one united organism, did they interact with one another, was one
Al-Ghazali, through his investigations, showed that both certainty of sense-perceptions (e.g. though the shadow of a stick that seems to imply that the stick is moving when it is not) and certainty of alleged intellectual truths (i.e. The possibility of judging an alleged fact in opposing and diverse manners) could be questioned. Turning to dreams, al-Ghazaali illustrates that wakefulness is simply a higher consciousness of the dream state. Might there
Our semester plans gives you unlimited, unrestricted access to our entire library of resources —writing tools, guides, example essays, tutorials, class notes, and more.
Get Started Now