Hi,
I just joined the philosophy forum. I have a question in mind that I have been mulling over for the past day.
I am reading about Descartes’ arguments in the Meditations, and I have reached the part in my book in which it speaks of Meditation III.
Descartes began his epistemological system with a persistent doubt about anything. Particularly, he discounted the evidence of his senses thinking that they were distrustful. For Descartes, if a doubt could be formulated concerning a given belief, he would suspend judgment about that particular belief.
In his doubt, he attempted to build on a sure foundation. He came to the conclusion that he could doubt everything except his own existence. Till this point, I more or less understood the text on the matter. Confusion came to the fore when, I read about his certainty of God’s existence. I have a hard understanding how he came to that conclusion. In fact, he introduced a new metaphysical principle by which he thought that an effect should contain as much reality as the cause which caused it. Even further, he gave the example of rocks and the like and thought he could cause these things to exist with his mind. Am I getting this right?
How does this mesh with his idea that he should doubt everything? Ultimately, I have a hard time explaining to myself how he came to the conclusions he held, that the existence of God is a certainty. He went even further and gave that God, the characteristics of the biblical God who is infinite, perfect and beneficent. Was he not simply expressing in this way his own already held beliefs since as we know, different people actually have different ideas about God. Was it not because of Christianity that he believed God to be perfect and infinite?
In the end, I wish someone could explain to me that whole passage and show to me how it meshes with Descartes’ own principle of doubting every belief he held.