Thank you, Gum Makur Gum, for such a perennial question!
What does it mean to exist? Until Kant, many philosophers thought that existence was a property of a substance, much like color, weight, mass, etc. Saying that “This flower is red” was similar to saying that “This flower exists”, meaning that the flower had the property of existence.
But, in his Critique of Pure Reason, Kant questioned this claim, and reached the conclusion that existence is not a real predicate. What does that mean?
Take the concept of a unicorn. We can talk about the properties of unicorns: they have horns extending from their foreheads, they have wings, they are usually white, etc. However, most people would deny the existence of unicorns, as there isn’t any clear evidence that they have ever wandered around our planet.
So, there is a difference between: (a) having a concept of something (i.e. God), together with certain properties (omniscience, omnipresence, etc.); and (b) that concept being instantiated in space and time. Kant insists that we can know things only in so far as they exist in space and time. Whether anything exists outside of space or time is a question no human being can answer. Most Christian and Islamic thinkers have argued that God exists outside of space and time. As far as human knowledge is concerned, God does not exist in space or time, as we don’t have any clear evidence of such a concept ever being instantiated.
Of course, there arises the question of what really counts as “evidence”. Claims about existence seem pretty straightforward in our everyday lives. The laptop that I am using right now exists; it allows me to type these words. The internet exists; it transmits my text to your screen, which also exists, and so on. Evidence is plentiful when everyday claims are concerned. With God, or other beings that are said to exist beyond our cognition, there seems to be scarcely any evidence at all.
This result does not preclude the possibility of believing in God. Saying “God exists” and saying “I believe that God exists” are two different propositions. One claim is about knowledge, about existing things; the other concerns our beliefs. One might interpret the world as an “artifact” created by an omnipotent God, one might believe that God has sent human beings certain precepts or principles via prophets or holy scriptures, one might believe there are specific gods which control specific events in nature. But none of these beliefs can justify the claim that God exists; all they can justify is the claim that “human beings believe that God exists”.
In short, we do not have any straightforward evidence that God exists; we do not have indubitable knowledge. Perhaps if we did, we would not require faith or religion or prophets; we would simply know that God exists.
What do you think? Do you believe that God exists? If so, why? Let us know in the comments.
And, as always, if you have a question for the Armchair Philosophers, don’t hesitate to get in touch. You could send us a message or fill in this form.
Be sure to check out our podcast!
If you like what we do, you can support us by buying us a coffee!
Image: God, from Michelangelo’s The Creation of Adam (1520)
I completed my MA and PhD at the Philosophy Department of Boğaziçi University. My main areas of research are history of philosophy, social and political philosophy, and moral philosophy. My dissertation was on Kant's account of conscience, so I had to work through most of Kant's texts. He is my favorite philosopher because he revolutionized the philosophical scene in Europe and still continues to be influential to this day. He was one of the first philosophers to work out a comprehensive system which integrates several areas of philosophy, and he has given me a remarkable sense of what philosophy can be.