out over time. One problem with his first proof is his idea of God. To see where the inconsistency lies, we must refer back to Descartes understanding of certainty and ideas, mainly methodic doubt. Ideas are things that resemble, or conform to, things outside of oneself and by using Descartes own logic we can see that these ideas can be doubted. So why is God not doubted? Descartes formed an idea of God as an infinitely good being. He would have had to discover this idea within his own mind. According to his principle of universal doubt, he cannot simply know whether his conception of God is correct or incorrect, just that he has it. He would have, as a matter of his own principle, considered it as false until proven otherwise. Therefore, since the idea of God is in doubt, the trustworthiness of ones reasoning must also be doubtful. Another problem with his first proof is that he uses his powers of reason without first proving that they are beyond doubt. The validity of Descartes reasoning is supposed to flow as a consequence of the infinite perfection of God. However God's infinite perfection is made certain to Descartes through the very same capacities that he has not proven trustworthy. Descartes accepts the trustworthiness of his ability in proving the existence and infinite perfection of God, and this cannot make sense thus is inaccurate. A doubtful ability would cause a doubtful argument, and in turn, produce a doubtful conclusion. A suspect reasoning process therefore nullifies the entire argument for Gods existence. Descartes reasoning of God's existence hinges on his use of 3 principals: the Principal of Contradiction, the Principal of Adequate Reality, and the Principal of Sufficient Reason. But seeing how these ideas seem to be preconceived in his mind, even before he begins to doubt. Can they be preserved and used in his arguments? Even if they are logical, they must be doubted under Descartes own methodic doubt structure. W...
