In The Beginning Was the Thought:

Descartes, Religion, and Science
By Steven Saus

"In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth (KJV)." With that statement, the Bible begins to create a faith-based cosmology whose geocentric idea persisted for centuries. Then with the heliocentric revelations of Copernicus and Galileo, the religious world fell into chaos. When all aspects of the Bible and New Testament were believed to be literally true, questioning any part of them cast the entire belief system into doubt. Such a thorny paradox could mean either the suppression of science or the loss of faith. In 1633, Galileo was put on trial for his support of heliocentric theory and a long period of animosity between science and religion truly got under way (Burnham and Fieser).

Descartes was a devout, if unorthodox, Catholic. He was also a scientist, having written books on optics, meteorology, and geometry (Burnham and Fieser). It is the fusion of these aspects of his personality that brought forth Meditations on First Philosophy.

In the preface, Descartes makes the claim that his purpose in Meditations is to prove the existence of God and the soul, in particular so that unbelievers can be swayed by the “best of all these arguments” for God (Descartes, 3). After perusing the Meditations, I must disagree with Descartes' stated purpose. Descartes was not writing to convince nonbelievers that God was feasible; he was writing to convince those who believed in God that science was feasible.

Descartes begins his Meditations by removing all prior evidence using the technique of hyperbolic doubt. In doing so, he not only provides a sound foundation for the following meditations, but also in a single swoop removes all other objections outside the framework of his argument. By removing all else, he is able to force the reader to re-evaluate their ideas of existence. This re-evaluation mirrors his purpose in forcing a re-evaluation of the foundations of faith, changing from traditional beliefs to one based on the fact of human existence. From his realization that only existence is demonstrably provable, Descartes slowly builds his philosophical proof of God. As part of his proof, it requires the premise that God is not a deceiver (Descartes, 52). Building upon this knowledge, Descartes continues on to demonstrate the reality of matter and our observations of it, although with some caveats. In short, Descartes’ final conclusion at the end of the Meditations is that by knowing God is not a deceiver, we “should no longer fear that those things that are daily shown . . .by the senses are false (Descartes, 90).” This provides a foundation for accepting observational science, even if that science contradicts a belief. Otherwise, by doubting the senses (when used with “careful inquiry”) one would be asserting that God is a deceiver (Descartes, 90)!

The strength of Descartes argument is in his methodology. By methodically admitting and re-admitting evidence he builds an exceptionally elaborate and strong philosophical treatise. His arguments are "correct" - that is, they are deductively sound. There are weaknesses in his argument, but they are not logical errors. Instead, all objections, both modern and in the Replies, appear to be objections to his premises. It is here that Descartes intentions are most strongly demonstrated. Descartes’ premises - especially those regarding the idea of God - would cause the argument to collapse when faced by atheists, but would be perfectly evident to a theistic audience.

For example, Descartes' attempts to explain the existence of human error in Meditation 4. Descartes claims that God made man imperfect in order to fulfill an ineffably perfect plan (Descartes, 62). This makes sense to Descartes, since God is, by his definition, perfect and could not err. If God could not err and appears to have done something wrongly, we must just not understand God’s plan. This type of apologetics does not get very far with either medieval or modern skeptics who do not take it as given that God is perfection. Still, it is an argument that is as palatable to modern Christians as it surely was to those of Descartes’ time.

These two aspects of the Meditations –proving God in such a way that denying reality is denying the goodness of God, and employing premises that would only be held by theists - strongly indicate that the Meditations is meant for believers to find room in their faith for science. The dedication of the Meditations to the Sorbonne – at the time a center of Catholic theology – only reinforces this view. If the Sorbonne were to accept his arguments, it would carry great weight in the Church (Burnham and Fieser).

Descartes’ arguments had mixed success. As noted, the methodology and logic of the work is without peer; Descartes’ logic is inexorable in its thoroughness. As long as his premises are found to be valid, the progression of his argument stands firm. Indeed, it is the strength and thoroughness of this argument that contributed to its lasting influence in philosophy. His success in reconciling the Church and science, however, was much more limited. His works were placed on the Index of Prohibited Works in 1663, and it would not be removed until 1882 (Burnham and Fieser). It was not until the three centuries after Descartes that the Catholic Church began to truly reconcile itself with science.

Was his effort successful? It should have been. Descartes’ arguments are logical and follow from premises that should have been accepted by all churchgoers at the time. What Descartes may have underestimated is the strength of dogma; he was being rational and using his will only to the limit of his perception. Unfortunately, his peers in the Church were not.

Works Cited

 Bought Love is a Salaried Position - Political Both Dreams and People Crash Down - Inspiration Shadows of the Spine - wierd and funny stuff Walking is the Process of Controlled Stumbling - religion Idle Thoughts Are Often True - The Work of Others Moments are the Measure of Our Lives - life under the microscope Newness is Relative - information overload Perceptions do not Limit Reality - miscellaneous This Space Intentionally Blank - free mail lists
Back to Newness is Relative
Bought Love is a Salaried Position - Political Both Dreams and People Crash Down - Inspiration From Unlikely Sources Shadows of the Spine - wierd and funny stuff Walking is the Process of Controlled Stumbling - religion Idle Thoughts Are Often True - The Work of Others Moments are the Measure of Our Lives - life under the microscope Newness is Relative - information overload Perceptions do not Limit Reality - uncategorized goodness This Space Intentionally Blank - free e-mail lists Some Rights Reserved