There are three key concepts that recur in the history of religious ideas: the soul or self; God

or the divine; and nature or the world. Discuss the relationship between the three in at least three of the thinkers covered in the class (from Augustine through Buber). Argue (or inquire) which of the views seems most reasonable, in comparison to the others, and why.

Kellie Konicki Philosophy of Religion Final Essay Word Count: 1,945

Konicki 1 Descartes, Buber, and Augustine all present sensible arguments for the nature of the self, God, and the world. Descartes provides proof for the existence of himself as a thinker and God as a perfect being. He also gives an explanation of how one can come to know natural things and begin to understand the world. Buber presents a concept of two distinct ways of engaging in the world. The first he calls experience or the mode of IIt and the second he refers to as encountering or the mode of I-You. Through the explanation of these ways of knowing, he draws conclusions about the nature of humanity in relation to other things (people, animals, nature) and in relation to God. Augustine argues for the sinful nature of the self and the world and that the only way to find fulfillment and escape sin is through a relationship with God. He defines God as a perfect spiritual being and as the creator and sustainer of the universe. Though all three thinkers provide intelligible insight into our understanding of ourselves, God, and the world, I feel as though Augustines ideas most accurately represent my views on these subjects and are the most coherent and reasonable. In his writings Meditations on First Philosophy, Descartes began his inquiry into his doubts on his own existence by examining the source of his own thoughts. He argued that he himself could be the source of these thoughts (Meditations 18). In order for that to be possible, he must exist. He maintained that as long as he thought he was something, no deceiver could ever convince him otherwise. Therefore, the very thought that he exists proves his own actuality. Descartes then began to question what exactly he was and determined that since he could not at that point prove himself as a body, he was solely a thinking thing (Meditations 20). By that he meant that he exists certainly only for as long as [he] is thinking (Meditations 19). He realized that nothing can be more easily or

Konicki 2 clearly perceived by [him] than [his] own mind (Meditations 24). Consequently, because he intellectually understood himself and his own mind, he is a being which exists and which has thoughts. Once he established himself as a thinker, Descartes wanted to determine where his thoughts were coming from. He argued that ones thoughts do not have to come from something similar to the actual idea in ones mind. He attributed this to the possibility that a supreme God, eternal, infinite, omniscient, all-powerful, and the creator of all things that exist beside Himself could produce the wide variety of thoughts and sensations which he was experiencing (Meditations 29). He then reasoned that the source of an idea must be greater or at least equal to the result or the idea itself. This meant that there must be something that is greater than him and his thoughts because it is not possible that they (his ideas) can be derived from him alone (Meditations 32). Therefore, the very concept of God as an infinitely perfect being proves His existence because perfection or the idea thereof cannot come from something imperfect. Descartes then began to question the nature of God and whether or not He is a deceiver. He determined that God is not subject to any kind of deficiency because He is perfect and He cannot be a deceiver because that suggests some shortcoming which is not possible for an infinitely perfect being (Meditations 37). The source of error, then, must come from the imperfections of humans. Error is not dependent on God but rather a deficiency of Him. Mistakes are made not because God is the cause of them but because the faculty of judging the truth is not infinite in man. Descartes lastly wanted to determine if it was possible to know material and natural things with certainty. He found that his bodily sense perceptions such as pain,

Konicki 3 pleasure, hunger, and thirst were useful in determining what is beneficial or harmful to the body and therefore could be seen as providing truth or a way of knowing his own body with certainty. He also held that since he has the idea of a body, it must have come from God since it is greater than himself and if God is not a deceiver then it must be true that bodily things exist (Meditations 56). Therefore, anything taught in nature such as senses of pain, light, heat, smells, and so forth must include some truth because they come from God who is not a deceiver. In his writings I and Thou, Buber discusses two modes of interacting with the world. The first, I-It is referred to as experience. Buber defined experience as I perceive something, I feel something, I imagine something, I want something, I sense something, I think something (I and Thou 54). The it is the object of experience and is seen solely as a thing to be utilized or to gain something from. Buber claimed that this is the kind of world in which we live. He also applied this concept to mans fundamental psychology, asserting that modern society is built on an I-it framework. Every political and social institution, and even our own personal lives are based on our concept of others as a means to an end or as an It rather than a You. As a result, people have come to feel alienated. He presents an alternative mode of living, which he calls encountering through an I-You relationship. He gives an example of a tree and how when viewed as an It, it is seen as consisting of various different parts and can be examined in many different ways, yet it still remains an object. However, when one views it as a You then it is no thing among things nor does it consist of things, but rather it is the tree itself (I and Thou 59). By viewing things and people as a You, one is able to experience the essence of the thing or the person and appreciate it for all that it is as a

Konicki 4 whole rather than examining its parts and how it can be used to benefit oneself. He calls this I-You relationship love. Buber then realizes that these encounters are only temporary and that it is only a matter of time before the You becomes an It again because once we begin to reflect on the You, it becomes an It. Therefore, this love that we experience is merely an alternation between encounter and experience and is not enough to fulfill our need for relationship. He maintains that the only way to have the whole fulfillment that we desire is through an encounter with God. Then, after an encounter with God, we begin to see everything and everyone as a You rather than an It and we no longer feel alienated, but rather we are satisfied and complete and can help others reach this goal as well. In Augustines Confessions, he argues that humans all have an inclination to do evil. He told a story of a time when he was young and he stole pears. He became evil for no reason and had no motive for [his] wickedness except wickedness itself (Confessions II:9). He asserts the idea of original sin, which is that because of Adam and Eves iniquities, all human beings are born into sin. This fallen state makes it impossible for man to reach God through human understanding even after death. Augustine defines sin as chasing after lesser goods which have their delights, but none comparable to [his] God who has made them all (Confessions II:10). He claims that in their perverted way, all humanity imitates God (Confessions II:14). He offers numerous examples of attributes of God that humans attempt to attain such as pride, ambition, and love, which are seen as good. In a sense, humans pursue the perfect forms of the goods whose absences become vices here on earth. The things that humans seek can only be found in God because He is the ultimate good and provides fulfillment for those desires.

Konicki 5 Both Descartes and Augustine discuss the idea of free will, that God allows human beings to make their own decisions. Augustine claims that the free choice of the will is the reason why we do wrong (Confessions VII:5). While both agree that the corrupted nature of human beings causes humans to choose to do evil things, Augustine makes claims about the nature of God in relation to the sinfulness of man. The key to understanding God is knowing His mercy or forgiveness of sins. Augustine recognizes that God forgave the iniquity of [his] heart and does not hold his sin against him because if He did, no man would be able to stand before God or have a relationship with Him as a result of their sin (Confessions I:6). Augustine talks to God directly, which implies a personal relationship with Him. He speaks of the nature of God as the creator of all things because without [Him}, whatever exists would not exist (Confessions I:2). Also, God is described as the infinite source of our fulfillment when Augustine claims that in filling all things, [God] fills them all with the whole of Himself (Confessions I:3). Augustine goes further and makes the argument that humans need a relationship with God and to praise [God] is the desire of man because He stirs man to take pleasure in praising [Him] because [He] made us for [Himself] and our hearts are restless until we find rest in Him (Confessions I:1).Therefore, a relationship with God (which Augustine regards as necessary) is only made possible by the grace and mercy of an infinitely perfect and loving God who is the creator and sustainer of life and who fulfills and satisfies the needs and desires of His creation. In conclusion, while Descartes and Buber both provide meaningful and valid contributions to the historical debates of the nature of the self, the divine, and the world, I believe that Augustine provides the best and most reasonable explanation for how these

Konicki 6 three concepts interrelate. He presents the idea of humanity as innately sinful and unable to do good apart from God. Then, he gives the idea of a perfect God who created all things to be in relationship with Him and to praise Him, and not only that, but to delight in doing so. The only problem would be that a perfect God cannot possibly relate to an imperfect human. However, through Gods mercy and love for His creation, He forgives the sins of man and sees them as perfect and blameless just so that He can have a relationship with them. Therefore, the interrelatedness between humans, God, and nature seems perfectly harmonious in this light because God made a way to fulfill and satisfy the desires of humans despite their inescapable sinful nature.

Works Cited Descartes, Ren, and Michael Moriarty. Meditations on First Philosophy: With Selections from the Objections and Replies. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2008. Print. Buber, Martin, and Walter Arnold Kaufmann. I and Thou. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1970. Print. Augustine. Confessions. Trans. Henry Chadwick. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2008. Print.