A path through philosophy
Does God exist?
Can reason prove — or disprove — the existence of God?
For a thousand years philosophers built ever-subtler arguments for a divine reality, and ever-sharper critiques of them. Follow the argument as it is made, transformed, and finally turned on itself.
- 1
Argues from the concept alone: God is 'that than which nothing greater can be conceived', and such a being must exist in reality — the ontological argument.
Responding toAugustine's faith seeking understanding
- 2
- 3
Rejects Anselm's a priori proof but offers the Five Ways — from motion, causation, contingency, degrees, and design — to a first cause 'all call God'.
Responding toAnselm and Avicenna
- 4
We can prove that God is, but never what God is; only negative attributes preserve God's absolute unity.
Responding tothe philosophers' positive theology
- 5
Cuts the other way: God's existence as Christians hold it cannot be demonstrated by reason at all — it is held by faith.
Responding toAquinas's confidence in proof
- 6
Rebuilds the proof from within: the idea of a perfect being could only come from a perfect being — God — who then guarantees that clear ideas are true.
Responding tohis own methodic doubt
- 7
Identifies God with Nature itself (Deus sive Natura) — one infinite substance, not a personal creator who could have made things otherwise.
Responding toDescartes
- 8
Only God supplies a sufficient reason for why anything exists at all — and why this, the best of all possible worlds.
Responding tothe principle of sufficient reason
- 9
Dismantles the design argument: the world-to-machine analogy is weak, and the reality of evil tells against a good, all-powerful designer.
Responding tothe argument from design
- 10
Shows every proof overreaches — existence is not a predicate, and God lies beyond possible experience — yet morality still points us toward God as a rational faith.
- 11
Declares that 'God is dead': the belief has become unbelievable, and we must face the loss of the foundation it gave to meaning and morality.
Responding tothe whole tradition of proofs
- 12
The modern skeptic's verdict: none of the classic arguments withstands scrutiny, and belief should be proportioned to evidence.
Responding toAquinas and the natural theologians
From Nietzsche onward the question shifts from proof to meaning: if the old foundation is gone, what takes its place? The argument never quite ends.