Intuition and faith

שו”ת › Category: faith › Intuition and faith

asked 8 years ago

Can the argument “God exists” be equivalent to the argument “I think therefore I exist”? Ultimately, both are based on intuitive assumptions. If we assume that the average person has a certain sense of creation, whether it is from a moral perspective, a thirst for something “beyond,” and many other reasons for a person to assume that there is a God who created him with a purpose, can it be simply defined as “I think (i.e., intuitively feel) that God exists, therefore He exists,” then the Rabbi believes that there is an objective place for our intuitions. I, in other words, feel within myself that to the same extent that I exist, I am certain that I and the entire world have a purpose, and that there is absolute morality, in short, that there is a Creator who intends the world. Is this argument flawed?
What do I say to a person who doesn’t feel this? Look around you! To me, he’s like a person who doubts his own existence (maybe the percentage of these crazy people is equivalent to ISTs)
With best regards, Y.,
Thank you very much and have a good day!

Discover more from הרב מיכאל אברהם

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Leave a ReplyCancel reply

0 Answers

0 Vote Up Vote Down

מיכי Staff answered 8 years ago

The argument “I think therefore I exist” is not an intuitive claim but a logical proof. The assumption that I do not exist leads to a contradiction. At least that is what it claims, and of course there are criticisms of it. As a rule, every ordinary argument is based on assumptions that usually originate in intuition. The argument you presented is not at all flawed. If someone doesn’t feel this – you have nothing to say to them on the level you described. At most, you can try to prove to them the existence of God using various methods (see the notebooks here on the site), or get them to feel this way in various ways (this is the field called rhetoric. And its identification with demagogy is, of course, very demagogic).

Discover more from הרב מיכאל אברהם

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

י' replied 8 years ago

Thanks for the answer Rabbi!
Following my question, what is the intuitive assumption of the cogito argument?
Wasn't Descartes himself forced to say that the sentence itself is actually an internal intuition due to logical difficulties?
And following the question of God, the Rabbi presented two ways to reach faith for a person who does not feel the same experience that I felt, 1. Let him turn to intellectual evidence 2. Let me try to explain to him that he also feels the same feelings, he simply does not call them “God” (in accordance with the dream of the Kuzari)
Isn't the first way flawed, after all, logical proofs are constantly at risk?
What is the reason that the Rabbi believes in God?
Thank you very much!

מיכי Staff replied 8 years ago

Hello.
As I explained, there is no assumption at the core of the cogito. This is the essence of the argument that it reaches a necessary conclusion from within itself without assumptions.
I did not understand the question of risk.
Regarding my evidence for belief, see five of my colleagues on the site.