place。 It has the characteristic that “In it we do not recognize existence as something merely
possible and accidental； as we do the conceptions of other things which we perceive clearly； but
as a really essential and eternal determination。 For instance； as mind perceives that in the
conception of a triangle it is implied that the three angles are equal to two right angles； the triangle
has them； and in the same way from the fact that mind perceives existence to be necessarily and
eternally implied in the Notion of the most perfect reality； it is forced to conclude that the most
perfect reality exists。” （18） For to perfection there likewise pertains the determination of
existence； since the conception of a non…existent is less perfect。 Thus we there have the unity of
thought and Being； and the ontological proof of the existence of God； this we met with earlier （p。
63； seq。） in dealing with Anselm。
The proof of the existence of God from the Idea of Him is in this wise： In this Notion existence is
implied； and therefore it is true。 Descartes proceeds further in the same direction； in so far as after
the manner of empirical axioms he sets forth： “There are different degrees of reality or entity； for
the substance has more reality than the accident or the mode； and infinite substance has more than
finite。” “In the Notion of a thing existence is implied； either the merely potential or the
necessary；” i。e。； in the ‘I’ there is Being as the immediate certainty of an other…being； of the
not…I opposed to the I。 “No thing or no perfection of a thing which really exists actu can have the
Nothing as original cause of its existence。 For if anything could be predicated of nothing； thought
could equally well be predicated of it； and I would thus say that I am nothing because I think。”
Descartes here arrives at a dividing line； at an unknown relationship； the Notion of cause is
reached； and this is a thought indeed； but a determinate thought。 Spinoza says in his explanation；
“That the conceptions contain more or less reality； and those moments have just as much evidence
as thought itself； because they not only； say that we think； but how we think。” These determinate
modes as differences in the simplicity of thought； had； however； to be demonstrated。 Spinoza adds
to this step in advance that “The degrees of reality which we perceive in ideas are not in the ideas
in as far as they are considered merely as kinds of thought； but in so far as the one represents a
substance and the other a mere mode of substance； or； in a word； in so far as they are considered
as conceptions of things。” “The objective reality of Notions （i。e。； the entity of what is represented
in so far as it is in the Notion）； 〃demands a first cause in which the same reality is contained not
merely objectively” （that is to say in the Notion）； “but likewise formally or even eminenter —
formally； that is perfectly likewise： eminenter； more perfectly。 For there must at least be as much
in the cause as in the effect。” “The existence of God； is known immediately” — a priori —
“from the contemplation of His nature。 To say that anything is contained in the nature or in the
Notion of a thing is tantamount to saying that it is true： existence is directly contained in the Notion
of God。 Hence it is quite true to say of Him that existence pertains of necessity to Him。 There is
implied in the Notion of every particular thing either a possible or a necessary existence — a
necessary existence in the Notion of God； i。e。 of the absolutely perfect Being； for else He would
be conceived as imperfect。” （19）
Descartes likewise argues after this manner： “Problem： to prove a posteriori from the mere
Notion within us the existence of God。 The objective reality of a Notion demands a cause in which
the same reality is not merely contained objectively” （as in the finite）； “but formally” （freely；
purely for itself； outside of us） “or eminenter” （as original）。 （Axiom。） “We now have a Notion of
God； but His objective reality is neither formally nor eminenter contained within us； and it can thus
be only in God Himself。” （20） Consequently we see that with Descartes this Idea is an
hypothesis。 Now we should say we find this highest Idea in us。 If we then ask whether this Idea
exists； why； this is the Idea； that existence is asserted with it。 To say that it is only a conception is
to contradict the meaning of this conception。 But here it is unsatisfactory to find that the conception
is introduced thus： ‘We have this conception；’ and to find that it consequently appears like an
hypothesis。 In such a case it is not proved of this content in itself that it determines itself into this
unity of thought and Being。 In the form of God no other conception is thus here given than that
contained in Cogito； ergo sum； wherein Being and thought are inseparably bound up — though
now in the form of a conception which I possess within me。 The whole content of this conception；
the Almighty； All…wise； &c。； are predicates which do not make their appearance until later； the
content is simply the content of the Idea bound up with existence。 Hence we see these
determinations following one another in an empirical manner； and not philosophically proved —
thus giving us an example of how in a priori metaphysics generally hypotheses of conceptions are
brought in； and these become objects of thought； just as happens in empiricism with investigations；
observations； and experiences。
Descartes then proceeds： “Mind is the more convinced of this when it notices that it discovers
within itself the conception of no other thing wherein existence is necessarily implied。 From this it
will perceive that that idea of highest reality is not imagined by it； it is not chimerical； but a true and
unalterable fact which cannot do otherwise than exist； seeing that existence is necessarily involved
in it。 Our prejudices hinder us from apprehending this with ease； for we are accustomed to
distinguish in all other things the essence” （the Notion） “from the existence。” Respecting the
assertion that thought is not inseparable from existence； the common way of talking is as follows：
‘If what men think really existed； things would be different。’ But in saying this men do not take
into account that what is spoken of in this way is always a particular content； and that in it the
essential nature of the finality of things simply signifies the fact that Notion and Being are separable。
But how can one argue from finite things to the infinite？ “This Notion；” Descartes continues； “is
furthermore not made by us。” It is now declared to be an eternal truth which is revealed in us。
“We do not find in ourselves the perfections which are contained in this conception。 Thus we are
certain that a first cause in which is all perfection； i。e。； God as really existent； has given them to us；
for it is certain to us that from nothing； nothing arises” （according to Boehme God derived the
material of the world from Himself）； “and what is perfect cannot be the effect of anything
imperfect。 From Him we must thus in true science deduce all created things。” （21） With the proof
of the existence of God the validity of and evidence for all truth in its origin is immediately
established。 God as First Cause is Being…for…self； the reality which is not merely entity or existence
in thought。 An existence such as this first cause （which is not what we know as a thing） rests in the
Notion of the not…I； not of each determinate thing — since these as determinate are negations —
but only in the Notion of pure existence or the perfect cause。 It is the cause of the truth of ideas；
for the aspect that it represents is that of their Being。
d。 Fourthly； Descartes goes on to assert： “We must believe what is revealed to us by God； though
we cannot understand it。 It is not to be wondered at； since we are finite； that there is in God’s
nature as inconceivably infinite； what passes our comprehension。” This represents the entrance of
a very ordinary conception。 Boehme on the other hand says （supra； p。 212）： ‘The mystery of the
Trinity is ever born within us。’ Descartes； however； concludes： “Hence we must not trouble
ourselves with investigations respecting the infinite； for seeing that we are finite； it is absurd for us
to say anything about it。” （22） This matter we shall not； however； enter upon at present。
“Now the first attribute of God is that He is true and the Giver of all light； it is hence quite contrary
to His nature to deceive us。 Hence the light of nature or the power of acquiring knowledge given
us by God can affect no object which is not really true in as far as it is affected by it” （the power
of acquiring knowledge） “i。e。； as it is perceived clearly and distinctly。” We ascribe truth to God。
From this Descartes goes on to infer the universal bond which exists between absolute knowledge
and the objectivity of what we thus know。 Knowledge has objects； has a content which is known；
we call this connection truth。 The truth of God is just this unity of what is thought by the subject or
clearly perceived； and external reality or existence。 “Thereby an en