On God...'nstuff...

A critical paper on Descartes' (in my opinion, invalid) argument for the existence of God...

Objection to the Ontological Argument

The purpose of this paper is to present a critique of Descartes’ ontological argument. This argument makes the assertion that a divine being must exist, given that man has within his mind, the concept of such a being. As Descartes states in the Meditations, “I have no choice but to conclude that the mere fact of my existing and of there being in me an idea of a most perfect being, that is, God, demonstrates most evidently that God too exists” (Meditation Three, 40).

The argument may be understood as follows. God is that of which nothing more perfect can be thought, and existence is more perfect than non-existence (Meditations three, 39 and 41). Thus, a God that exists, is necessarily more perfect than a God that does not exist. It follows that if the concept of a perfect, infinite being exists in the mind of man, then it must be preceded by the actuality of God’s being (Meditations three, 39).

The problem arises with the assertion that a God that exists is more perfect than a God that does not exist. Descartes defines nothingness as ”what is at the greatest possible distance from any perfection” (Meditations three, 41). This, however, is a fallacious definition, as existence is not something which can be attributed to, or denied to a being. For example, by no means could one make the claim that there is a God who does not hold the attribute of existence. Such a statement would be self-contradictory. Thus, that which does exist cannot be said to be more, or less perfect than that which does not exist. Such things are incomparable. Since the premise that a God which exists is more perfect than a God which does not, is false, the argument given by Descartes does not provide adequate evidence for the existence of God.