A Critical Study of Spinoza's Existential Arguments in Proving the Existence of God

Spinoza is one of the thinkers who has used existential arguments to prove the existence of God. He has presented six different versions of this argument. These arguments have received less attention from researchers. In the following work, these arguments are presented and criticized in a descriptive-analytical manner using library data. As understood by the findings of this research, Spinoza has used the concept of God in three ways in these versions: the concept of God as a concept, the concept of God in terms of indicating something beyond itself, and the subjective existence of the concept of God. Also, these arguments have various criticisms, such as confusion between the first and common conception with regard to the predicate, confusion between the two with regard to the subject, contradiction, begging the question, and lack of attention to the quality of the formation of the concept of God in the mind. The final conclusion of this research is that all these arguments are incomplete for the purpose and are ineffective in proving the reality of God.