Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
the woeful yearning to be organized within some higher order of things; to find
animal nature to seek security in this world through assembly, so as not to be easily
consumed by its limitless horrors and curiosities. And it is this latter aspect that is
perhaps more frightening, consolidating the bonds that make us human. How do we
explain the unexplainable? How can we objectively attribute purpose and meaning
purpose and meaning? The futility of existential inquiry may precede human
are essential to the intellectual pursuit of knowledge and definition. Likewise, the
God, supreme creator and ruler of all things, omnipotent, omniscient, and
omnipresent in everything, provides this sense of belonging to those with faith in his
intellect, the notion that God is both the question and answer to mankind’s
existence and sense of purpose is a topic that is not lightly discussed by those who
have attempted to prove and disprove his existence. Certainly, even the concept of
despite the best efforts of human logic and reason, it becomes clear that such a
1
conclusion would be worthless, if not contradictory, to the concept of God itself.
There can be no proof for the existence of God but the existence of God itself.
medieval thinkers who tried to create a proof for it. Historic philosophers such as St.
Augustine of Hippo, St. Anselm of Canterbury, Avicenna, and St. Thomas Aquinas all
several of their ideas are contradictory, they all shared a common belief in God’s
existence and that there may be some logical method of extrapolating His existence
backbone to the societal order of the time, they attempted this feat with the highest
of motivations and intellectual prowess, which make their proofs all the more
significant to the discussion of what God is and whether He must necessarily exist.
essential truths: that we exist, that we are alive, and that we have reason. We can
infer these as undeniable because we must exist in order to question our existence.
these first two notions as having validity, we must have the ability to reason. Using
whereas to prove that if there is something greater than human reason it must be
God. We affirm that two plus three equals five because it is necessarily true and
does not rely upon human existence, life, or reason; it is simply understood and
2
accepted. Therefore, the truth of mathematics, which is beyond human reason,
While this argument is quite rational and strong in its design, is does nothing
to prove the existence of God as any sort of worldly entity. One must compromise
with faith to purport the corporeal nature of his existence, or we could instead
God’s existence to mathematical truth may bolster one’s preexisting faith in God’s
existence, but it could just as easily bolster one’s faith in the natural science that
governs our universe. Therefore, we are still left to wonder as to what the concept of
God truly describes, and whether there His being shares the same self-awareness of
human existence.
logical reasoning. If one can envision the concept of “something that which nothing
held notion of God as a perfect being. Likewise, if we have this concept of which
there can be no greater concept, it must have been instilled by the truth of its
existence. For if we deny the existence of “something that which nothing greater
something greater, something greater that which nothing greater can be thought.
While this proof provides logical evidence that human beings can rationalize
the concept of an infinite existence and being, it falls short with Augustine in
providing any sort of necessity for the existence of a self-aware God-like being.
Anselm can argue any number of ways that our conceptualization of infiniteness
3
must be attributed to the form of infiniteness being instilled upon us by an infinite
being, yet psychological reasoning and ability could just as easily account for us to
of finite because can perceive things with finite beginnings and endings, so that if
though quite grand in its scope, does little more than prove the existence of the
concept of God.
slightly from Anselm’s ontological proof for the existence of God. By first outlining
existential thought. His argument is that the existence of possible beings must be
can infer that in order for earthly creatures to exist as possible beings, there must
be some initial, necessary being which acted as a prime mover—a cause to the
effect. Avicenna further rationalizes that the only being to which we can attribute
such causal efficacy is God, who we must then say has a necessary existence.
Therefore, Avicenna’s God would not necessarily need to have any sort of corporeal
existence or continued relationship with His subjects following the initial cause for
life. Nevertheless, this proof also lacks any substantial evidence for the existence of
a God outside of conceptualization. The initial cause need not necessarily be any
sort of self-aware being, and thus does not necessarily prove any sort of intelligent
4
design or purpose in its cause. In order to prove the existence of a God apart from
established that such a being understands its own existence and necessarily intends
for the causation of possible existence. Otherwise, Avicenna, along with Augustine
and Anselm, all develop proofs for the existence of God without necessarily proving
God’s existence. Doctor Angelicus emphasizes the notion that God’s existence is not
self-evident, and instead requires contemplation upon how and to what extent we
can know of God’s infinite characteristics. The existence and essence of God are
two separate notions of which we can understand, of which the latter notion is
impossible for us to understand, as one thing cannot know the essence of another
thing without essentially having one and the same essence. Therefore, to say that
God exists mentally and God exist both mentally and actually are two completely
different understandings of the concept of God’s existence and God’s real existence.
However, to say that God’s existence is only true through demonstration of faith is
initial creation. This demonstration of God’s existence can be proven in five ways,
all of which have been supposed by the aforementioned philosophers: initial cause
for the motion of all things, the necessity of an initial cause, the necessary form of
all things possible, the forms of goodness and perfection, and the cause for
Aquinas purports human beings reason is God, which is a being who must actually
5
As Aquinas’ argument is by far the most expansive of all proofs for the
existence of God, it can perhaps be said to be the only one with reasonable validity.
Nevertheless, it relies upon the faith of the individual to either accept the truthiness
of his understanding of the world or deny such an outline for the properties of our
existence. While it might certainly bolster one’s notion of faith in God’s existence, it
who believe the mysteries of science to be reasons for God’s existence will similarly
implied by Aquinas’ proof. The fact remains that observed chaos in the universe
devalues any sort of unified understanding of existence, even when the aspects
described can be so well reasoned. Critically analyzed, Aquinas’ conclusion that all
by the philosopher. Comprehensive reasoning and logic aside, to have faith in his
proof is akin to already having faith in a biblical God and it becomes a necessary
concept and corporeal, self-aware being will ultimately fall short of undeniable truth.
millennia saturated by bloodshed over religious disparity. There is both reason and
lack of reason in proving his existence, the effects of which lead to enumerable
mechanisms. Therefore, it must be reasoned that only God’s existence itself can
prove God’s existence. Or perhaps it is more desirable to assert that either only God
6
can understand Himself, or he does not exist. As it has been countlessly reaffirmed
by failed attempts at a unifying theory and proof for God’s existence, to attempt
any sort of understanding greater than this will only result in affirming those with
faith and those without to their respective personal inclinations. Perhaps the
musings of the great renaissance philosopher, Voltaire, best sum up this volition as,
“If there were no God, it would have been necessary to invent him.” Idealistically,