Critical Analysis of Descarte' Meditations - a comparison with two other thinkers.

If you order your cheap custom essays from our custom writing service you will receive a perfectly written assignment on Critical Analysis of Descarte' Meditations - a comparison with two other thinkers.. What we need from you is to provide us with your detailed paper instructions for our experienced writers to follow all of your specific writing requirements. Specify your order details, state the exact number of pages required and our custom writing professionals will deliver the best quality Critical Analysis of Descarte' Meditations - a comparison with two other thinkers. paper right on time.

Out staff of freelance writers includes over 120 experts proficient in Critical Analysis of Descarte' Meditations - a comparison with two other thinkers., therefore you can rest assured that your assignment will be handled by only top rated specialists. Order your Critical Analysis of Descarte' Meditations - a comparison with two other thinkers. paper at affordable prices with cheap essay writing service!

Faith is an inseparable essence of our existence, and as such, carries its authority without the burdensome responsibility of reason. However, humankind has an infinite capacity for doubt and questions matters that hang on the verge of our comprehension. The matter of God's existence lacks empirical evidence and hasn't grounds for substantive rational certainty. Nevertheless, faith and religion have occupied the minds of many for many a generation and despite their irrational foundation have provided for rational moral concepts that are the foundation of our civilization. To question the existence of God is natural. It is important to seek proof of the world. However, it is equally important and essential to choose the right method of reasoning and to evaluate assumptions as critically as possible to avoid doubting a greater unknown and accepting another in its place. Philosophers and thinkers throughout the ages have tried to approach the issue with the tools of thought (Descartes; Spinoza; Weils). Rene Descartes, in his Meditations offers one of the most appealing of arguments for the existence of God. In his book, Discourse on Method and Meditations, Descartes exercises the reasoning power of his great mind to foster a methodical effort of regression and analysis with an astounding conclusion of God's necessary existence. His method is profoundly tedious and essentially persuasive. Yet, the underlying premise remains questionable and not beyond reasonable doubt. The purpose of this paper is to critically analyze Descartes' Meditations and to compare his reasons for the existence of God with the ideas of two other prominent philosophers, Benedict de Spinoza and Simone Weils.

A more recent thinker, Simone Weil, has a different approach to explaining the existence and essence of God. In an essay The Things of the World Weil presents her views as a combination of perceptive categorical generalizations and perilous nostalgia. Her assumptions show a refined and perceptive conception, which despite all its appealing resonance and reverence of common belief, elude logical methodology. Another great thinker, Benedict de Spinoza, deriving somehow that in the universe no two things of the same substance can exist, came up with a slightly different, but equally thorough argument for the existence of God.

Rene Descartes First Meditation explains his plan in pursuit of knowable truths. His systematic breakdown of the set of things he previously claimed to know is typical and substantiated. In Meditation I, Descartes develops the groundwork for his instrumental philosophical thesis. The basic truths are merely the stones on which we base our existence and the existence of our world. In the final paragraph of the section, he comes down to what he believes is a necessary consideration in the search for some fundamental knowable truth(s) - he supposes the existence of an evil deceiver who may potentially deceive him in everything he appears to observe and think about. His consideration of this is valid and necessary. However the mere fact that he continues optimistically in his pursuits after the considerations in this section shows his implicit belief that he is not being deceived in his current or future deliberations on the matter. This simple flaw seems to contradict the very essence of this meditation. Descartes, whose elegant conclusion in Meditation II states, 'cogito ergo sum' begins to weave a distinctly tangible pattern of assumptions leading to a virile conclusion that God must necessarily exist. However, all that Descartes has really proved is that he has a mind. He has not proved that he has a body or that an external world exists or that the thoughts in his mind other than "I exist" are true. Ren� Descartes' major philosophical project was to sort out what we have good grounds for believing from that for which we have insufficient grounds. In Descartes Meditation , all but matters of religious faith, authority is rejected as the basis of belief. Ultimately, the logical grounds for belief are those characteristics shared by mathematical propositions, a certain clarity and distinctness. But before he could rest content with these grounds, Descartes believed he had to subject them to a severe test. Descartes project was to validate the use of the human faculties in gaining knowledge of the world. He was able to accept or reject various propositions at will. He concluded that it was possible to trust the use of rational intuition in establishing that he exists and that he is a thinking thing with an understanding and will. In Meditation 1, Descartes had held that God could deceive him about the truth of very simple matters, such as that + = 5. (Descartes 6-8) To show that these ideas were safe, Descartes had to prove that God exists and is no deceiver. There are two arguments in the Meditations for Gods existence. The first is an argument unique to Descartes. "I am an incomplete and dependent being, the idea of a complete and independent being, that is to say of God, presents itself with such distinctiveness…" (Descartes 1). The idea of God is that of an "infinite, perfect being' stems from the assumtion that perection could not have originated within our mind independent and is, therefore, a concept originating in God. He writes in the following statement "I, who posess this idea, am or exist, I conclude so evidently that God exists…" (Descartes 1-14) He claims that his method contains the computational / mathematical method of reasoning. And, it appears that there is no other method of reasoning or deducing the essential, basic known that can yield the same kind of certainty. However, a high degree of doubt concerning the motive and relevance of the argument exists. What if it is possible to conceive of the process of perfection without understanding what is perfect It is plausible, but not completely compelling, to conclude that Descartes is advocating the application of computational / mathematical reasoning to all topics. Whether he actually implements this tool to a necessary degree, or establishes appropriate measures of all variables remains to be a source of confusion.

Tackling the same issue, but froma different front, Benedict de Spinoza stated that "God, or substance consisting of infinite attributes, of which each expresses eternal and infinite essentiality, necessarily exists" (Spinoza XI). Although it is difficult to consider God in terms of Spinozas substance, and ignorance plays an important role in this obstacle, it is possible to grasp the idea if one considers Spinozas previous prepositions. For example, in Preposition VII, Spinoza states that "Every substance is necessarily infinite." That in itself is not very convincing because observation suggests that there are things and substances with definite beginnings and ends, or at least as far as perceptions lead to understanding of the universe. However, Spinoza's approach uses the same regression analysis to deconstruct the material substance of our universe in an attempt to deduce the primary sourse of its creation.

Help with essay on Critical Analysis of Descarte' Meditations - a comparison with two other thinkers.

As a contrast, Simone Weil offers an entirely different view of God. Her ideas imply a great degree of divine revelation and leave the reasoning logic behind. It is not clear if her revelation is genuine or not. Her imagery and symbolism suggest a more common and more emotional understanding of God. She applies all effort to explain God as a benevolent being, whose essentially eternal nature cannot exist within our understanding of time. The image of God as a humble beggar certainly evokes a strong emotional response. (Weil 44). However, she relies on emotions and to some extent on popular generalizations to advocate her point. One clear distinction of Wiel's concept is the construct of Time. "Time, which is our one misery, is the very touch of his hand. It is an abdication by which he lets us exist." (Weil 45). To make her point clear, she offers an image of God as a beggar patiently waiting to receive those who choose to come to him. (Weil 44). It is an image of a benevolent God, whose eternal nature does not fit into the framework of our own concept of time. "The acceptance of time and of whatever it may bring-without any exception (amor fati) that is the only disposition of the soul, which is unconditioned in relation to time." (Weil 45). The finite and the infinite cannot coexist because while the eternal dwells in all time, the mortal can only exist in one period insignificant to the eternal. Still, Weil does not offer clear logical reasoning. Her approach is to present ideas in a metaphor designed to gain sympathy with popular beliefs. Her approach totally differs from Descartes. The French philosopher, while cautious of the religious authority of his day, attempts to doubt the popular assumptions to as much a depth as possible. Weil, in contrast, offers her views with the main assumption that there is no doubt about Gods existence. She gives the impression that faith is a natural extenuation and the existence of God is certain. Yet, her plea is not as appealing as some other precepts of religious revelation. There is an underlying current of frustration in Weil and little foundation of methodical reason such as offered by Descartes. This is not to say that Descartes' conclusions totally satisfy his purpose. Descartes makes astounding leaps into the metaphysical and abandons the empirical so often as to frustrate the modern intellect. For example, in Meditation Four he asserts that the concept of perfection could only come from a higher being. (Descartes 1). He assumes that being is God. This is an unreliable assumption because it is possible that the concept of perfection is a model of our own faculties and a natural extension of our imagination. Furthermore, it is also possible that the construct of perfection originated from a higher being, but not God. There is a fundamental overlap here between Descartes and Weil. As different as they are, both thinkers show a bias in attempting to confirm their expectation that God exists. Although Descartes states that he will doubt the existence of all things, there is a missing attempt to effectively deny God's existence. His whole exercise is to prove God exists and this bias prevents him from being totally objective. Likewise, and more definite, is Weils unwavering belief that God exists. Her conviction is strong and her concepts, therefore, reflect the fire of earlier Christian philosophers, whose goals were not so much the pursuit of truth, but a burning desire to protect the interests of the Church. She tells the readers what it means to love God. To give one's life for God is less noble than to die for the most miserable convict. (Weil 44). She seems to speak from a higher authority. However, it is impossible to tell if she herself is following a true God. The following statement shows how much bias is in Weil's argument "If a soul speaks of God with words of faith and love, either publicly or inwardly, this is no proof either for others or for itself. It may be that what it calls God is an impotent being, that is to say, a false God, and that it never really slept with God." (Weil 4). Perhaps her ideas are noble, but they are also presumptuous and ambiguous. She assumes to know without supporting her claims with reason. True, Faith is reason in itself. Weil's argument would have had merit in the thirteenth century, when faith had ultimate authority from the Church.

Reason may not be effective in determining God's existence. After all, the whole concept of revelation defies reason and yet establishes a profoundly firm foundation for faith. However, Weil's assumptions have some flaws. It is likely that revelation may reverberate in many manifestations and a revealed god may be false. Then, Weils assumptions have as much potential for error as do other religious dogmas. Surprisingly, her approach is more endearing, even if it alienates many true believers whose cultural traditions guide them to accept different names for essentially the same concept of religion. Descartes also makes many questionable assumptions. His concept of perfection, for example, may have meaning in terminology. However, there is a certain error in assuming that perfection is finite (as in the form of God). If perfection is infinite, then it is impossible to conceptualize it because of the ongoing process it naturally implies. Thus, it is possible to conceive of the ongoing process of perfection, but impossible to conceive total perfection. Descartes could not have conceived of a 'perfect being'. He could have only conceived of ongoing perfection, which is an infinite process. Perhaps reason has limits and will never reach as far as God. Reason is also an infinite process.

WORKS CITED

Descartes, Rene Discourse on Method and the Meditations. Translated by F.E.

Sutcliffe, Penguin Books

Benedict de Spinoza, The Ethics (1677), translated from the Latin by R.H.M. Elwes

(188) Part 1 - [Scanned and proof read by Edward A. Beach, Department of Philosophy and Religion, University of Evansville.] ONLINE, The INTERNET http//www.knuten.liu.se/~bjoch50/works/spinoza/ethics.html

Weil, Simone The Things of the World Essay.

Please note that this sample paper on Critical Analysis of Descarte' Meditations - a comparison with two other thinkers. is for your review only. In order to eliminate any of the plagiarism issues, it is highly recommended that you do not use it for you own writing purposes. In case you experience difficulties with writing a well structured and accurately composed paper on Critical Analysis of Descarte' Meditations - a comparison with two other thinkers., we are here to assist you. Your cheap research papers on Critical Analysis of Descarte' Meditations - a comparison with two other thinkers. will be written from scratch, so you do not have to worry about its originality.

Order your authentic assignment from cheap essay writing service and you will be amazed at how easy it is to complete a quality custom paper within the shortest time possible!