Why did he start trying to say God existed and he could prove it? Because he couldn't... And then he ruins the book why twittering on about how he knows God must exist 'or the idea would not exist' within him.
Was he just afraid he would get burnt at the stake ?
>perceive the existence of a benevolent God
>trust your perceptions because a benevolent God would not deceive you by altering your perceptions
Perfect logic. No circular reasoning at all. Give this man the Nobel prize in dick.
He's the worst disaster in the history of philosophy
>Why did he start trying to say God existed and he could prove it? Because he couldn't
I can essentially prove God exists to anyone who is not a fool or a hardened denialist.
The history of philosophy is scat
The magical thinking is strong with this one.
>The magical thinking is strong with this one
The evidence is strong with me.
You think it's evidence because of magical thinking. You'll grow out of it. When you're an old man, you'll look back at this phase and wonder what the hell you were doing.
He just couldn't let go of the spook, otherwise he would have succumbed to existential crisis. He found that faith was essential in him being able to believe in the world.
what a fag
don't respond to him.
Why do theists always resort to linking to videos or telling people to read the shit that they agree with as if that will pull the discussion anywhere? Communicate your own ideas with your own words in the post itself, like a normal person.
>You think it's evidence because of magical thinking. You'll grow out of it. When you're an old man, you'll look back at this phase and wonder what the hell you were doing.
No, I was an atheist for over a decade. Your governments' employees are going to be spending eternity in prison for high treason against the Emperor.
There's no magical thinking - just evidence supporting the existence of God as described by most pagans:
>Why do theists always resort to linking to videos or telling people to read the shit that they agree with as if that will pull the discussion anywhere? Communicate your own ideas with your own words in the post itself, like a normal person.
God is a communal organism - not belonging to any individual and not relative to any individual's opinions about God - hence I am showcasing God's power over mortals of this species.
No one was burnt at the stake.
His argument is actually fairly sound if you're a Platonist.
Brainlets go to
/pol/ is scat
>Because he couldn't...
>starting a sentence with because
maybe that's why you don't see he's right, user.
He was a meta-Kantian predating Kant.
>Perfect logic. No circular reasoning at all.
perfect logic is necessarily circular reasoning
en.wikipedia.org
Logic is pleb tier anyway, Aristotlean mysticism is where it's at.
> He was a meta-Kantian predating Kant.
Into the trash it goes then
...
>predating Kant
Guess that Descartes was a priori for Kant
Ba-dum tsss
>I-I'm sorry... I just wanted to participate in the thread ;_;
Replace every instance of god with dick and everything he says makes more sense.
haha
this
cringe
He was working with what he had. Some concepts in idealism are scientifically sound, but he had no way of proving it, so just throw God in there.
Kant BTFO his ontological argument in the Critique of pure reason
>I cannot understand ontological arguments, so they don't count.
>Why do theists always resort to linking to videos
He's not just some normal theist.
He's a literal (as in diagnosis and psych hospitalization history) schizophrenic who makes nonsensical content mash-up videos on youtube and then links them repeatedly to completely unrelated Veeky Forums posts.
That's how schizophrenia works, they think they're doing something meaningful when everyone else just sees a crazy person obsessing over a massive pile of bizarre non sequitur associations. It's hard for them to gain insight into the fact they're doing this because they're so convinced by their own associations that they infer even more associations on top of their starting associations, and even more associations on top of that, etc., until they're so far off into batshit crazy land that their mental sandcastle seems more real to them than what everyone else recognizes as consensus reality. And then the hallucinations kick in because their brain's mildly inflamed and producing crazy person mental static, and the voices they hear get incorporated into the evidence for their still escalating web of crazy associations about the world around them, at which point they freak out or otherwise draw enough attention to themselves that they end up back in the psych hospital.
So really it's better to pity him rather than to insult him. It's not his fault, he's just stuck in a partially biological downward spiral of self-destructive mental habits.
Descartes invokes God as a grounds for the establishment of an objective reality that corresponds to our senses beyond all doubt.
science is not idealistically sound, in the true sense of the word. It's technically fallacious.
>perceive the existence of a benevolent God
Descartes specifically deduces it. He differentiates between knowledge and perception.
"no"
God exists because we were seeded by a transcendent empire of aliens, those same aliens sent a device down to earth before humanity had gained the ability to learn, the device is so alien to those pre-human mammals that it sparks their ability to learn and unerstand and creates the seeds of sentience