Since the beginning of time, we as humans have contemplated the reason behind our existence and how we came to be here. Instinctively, we assume that our bodies have been designed to function a certain way, which means there must be a designer who is responsible. Despite this logical assumption, there are individuals who hold doubt and require a more logical explanation supported by evidence for the existence of a higher power.
In pursuit of greater knowledge and a clear explanation, we look at the work of great thinkers who dedicated their lives to finding evidence to either disprove or support the existence of a supreme architect of the universe we inhabit. I believe we have been presented with enough evidence to logically assume the presence of a higher power, or God, as most people prefer to call it.
One of the most powerful arguments for the existence of God can be found in the work of Immanuel Kant; who proposes the idea that God is necessary for humans to possess unbiased ethics and morals. Kant’s argument for God’s existence works on the notion that humanity has a collective sense of right and wrong.
This collective perception of morality is evidence of God’s existence. Initially, Kant focused on the categorical imperative; our individual sense of duty and the cause of morality which leads us to do things like pay our debts and treat other humans with respect. He stated that our collective sense of duty is to achieve the highest good, but morality and pleasure are liberated from each other. Usually, those willing to suffer for the good of others often appear unhappy, while selfish individuals seem to be happier because they are not sacrificing anything for others.
Kant later expresses that following death we will find unity in morality and pleasure. Kant’s proposal can be condensed down to three phases, first; morality commands that we work towards the highest good, second; the highest good is not attainable without God’s assistance, and third; God’s existence is vital for us to be successful in pursuit of our collective and individual duties to obtain the highest good.
In addition to the work of Immanuel Kant, we can find a rational explanation of God’s existence in the work of Rene Descartes. The French philosopher brought forth an ontological argument in the Fifth Meditation of his Meditations on First Philosophy. Descartes wrote,” But, if the mere fact that I can produce from my thought the idea of something entails that everything that I clearly and distinctly perceive to belong to that thing really does belong to it, is not this a possible basis for another argument to prove the existence of God?
Certainly, the idea of God, or a supremely perfect being, is one that I find within me just as surely as the idea of any shape or number. And my understanding that it belongs to his nature that he always exists is no less clear and distinct than is the case when I prove of any shape or number that some property belongs to its nature.” With this statement he is claiming that God’s existence can be realized by his nature; as an example, Descartes used the subtraction of angles within a triangle.
He proposed the idea that the notion of God is a divine, supreme being; assuming our existence must have been established by perfection. Consequently, if the concept of God did not comprise of existence then it would be flawed. According to Descartes, the idea of a non-existent God does not make sense; equivalent to the idea that a triangle would not exist if there were not three sides. If God is existence and existence is the essence of God, then we would not be able to comprehend the notion of a God. Therefore, God must exist.
Lastly, we can look at the work of St. Thomas Aquinas and find another very reasonable argument for God’s existence. Aquinas brought forth a cosmological argument based on universal causality. This explanation states that nothing in existence can be the efficient cause of itself. Aristotle also came to this conclusion, stating,” there must be an immortal, unchanging being, ultimately responsible for all wholeness and orderliness in the sensible world’.
Although these arguments are rational and sound, there are valid oppositions to them. For example, Immanuel Kant opposed the ontological argument because he believed that existence cannot be used as a property to describe people or things. In other words, it’s not possible to use existence as an attribute of God while defining God as existence. When it comes to the moral argument that Kant proposed, it states that our duties are absolute, but it doesn’t offer any information to settle conflicts of duty. Philosopher, David Hume, argues that the existence of the universe and its intricate design does not prove the existence of a God.
Hume explains that even if we prove there is a designer of the universe, we cannot know anything for certain about the designer. While Hume is opposing the existence of God, this viewpoint ties into Aquinas’ claim that humans are not able to know the true nature of God. These arguments always seem to counteract each other and that mirrors the duality of life. Some philosophers doubt God’s existence because there is evil in the world, but in my opinion, that duality makes the idea more rational.
The nature of duality proves that we as humans have free will, which was given to us by our designer. This we can know about our creator because we experience it everyday and it is what shapes us as individuals, as well as society. Humans have developed organized systems of government and laws from the foundation of duality. Throughout time we have developed a keen sense of right and wrong; we have learned what is right by experiencing what is wrong.
There is something within us that allows us to know the difference and gives us the opportunity to evolve. We have been given the ability to empathize with other beings and to feel a moral obligation to help them. Some people still choose to do the wrong things because in some way it makes them feel good, then there are other people who do the right things for the wrong reasons and that is where free will comes in to play. God is not an almighty dictator, he is merely a designer.
The universe is like playing a video game in freestyle mode; we are all instinctively aware of some hidden guidelines, but we are not forced to obey them by the creator and we are able to independently develop our objectives. We will never truly know the reason why we exist, but we can know that a higher power is responsible by observing the way we interact with the world and how intricately it was designed
