Assess whether Descartes succeeds in establishing the existence of God

Descartes’ first argument in favor of God has become known as the Trademark Argument; here Descartes attempts to show that the only way he could have had an idea of God would be if there was a God in existence to put it there. His argument relies on the Causal Adequacy principle that states that the cause of something must be at least equal to or greater than it’s effect. From here Descartes concludes that nothing contains equal perfection to God other God himself and therefore only He could be capable of the idea in Descartes’ mind and as a result must exist in order for it to be there.

Regrettably there are flaws in Descartes’ argument that perhaps hinder his success in proving the existence of God. Primarily it appears that we are provided with a circular argument in which he attempts to prove that clear and distinct ideas lead him clearly to the truth that then prevents him from being radically deceived by the demon. In order to ensure the dependency of these ideas he looks to an omnipotent and benevolent God that would secure the validity of the truths in that surely such a God would not let Descartes be deceived. However whilst doing so he uses clear and distinct ideas to prove that God exists. That is that he relies on the inability of God to deceive as justifying the reliability of clear and distinct ideas whilst claiming that existence of clear and distinct ideas points towards God thus making the argument circular. As a result of the cyclical nature of this argument Descartes’ entire push towards establishing the existence of God is weakened as before he can provide believable evidence he must provide and external justification or proof of either the existence of clear and distinct ideas or God.

Furthermore, we could attack Descartes’ use of the Causal Adequacy Principle and its premise that “there must be at least as much reality in the efficient and total cause as in its effect”. This could be challenged by looking at real life examples such as a whisper causing an avalanche or a match resulting in a bonfire both of which display less reality that what they produce. What is more, the chaos theory appears to suggest that great effects can come of relatively small causes evident in the butterfly effect in which one flap of a butterfly’s wings can set in motion a large chain of more significant effects or similarly the chain of events that leads to a hurricane. This challenge can also be seen in Darwin’s theory of evolution in which incremental changes can complex creatures over time. All of these examples appear to provide evidence of a cause containing much less ‘perfection’ than its effect and thus rebutting the Causal Adequacy Principle on which Descartes’ Trademark Argument is based which results in further weakening of his attempt to prove God’s existence.

Also, we can attack the coherence of God as Descartes’ claims. For example he claims Him to be both omnipotent and omniscience. To which we can respond with a questioning whether such a God could provide Himself with a task He cannot do. If the answer were to be yes then His inability to do such a thing would be eliminate His omnipotence whilst if the answer were no then this limits His knowledge, no longer making Him omniscience. You could further this with the illustration of God creating a stone that He cannot lift. Should He not be able to create such a stone he wouldn’t have the power to create everything ridding him of his omnipotence. However if he can lift the stone that he is unable to create something that he can’t lift which once again strips God of his Omnipotence. It appears to us that Descartes’ concept of a omnipotent God is flawed and riddled with incoherencies which only further destroys the credibility and success of his argument.

In conclusion, despite the strength of Descartes’ argument at the time and his clever use of the Causal Adequacy Principle - on the grounds of its destruction through modern day examples and various flaws in Descartes’ concept of God along with incredibly damaging threat of the Cartesian Circle I must conclude that Descartes fails to provide justified evidence of God’s existence.