Descartes A Method of Faith?

I have been searching the net with no luck on Descartes to find arguments on him starting from a theistic conclusion and working his way back to to his premise. To clarify I think Descartes like most theist started with God and and worked his way back to a starting premise. He wants to prove God exist. Not as an agnostic arguing probability but as a theist who is already convinced. Since his most important work is based on a method of doubt it looks as if he is an agnostic doubting everything then surprise surprise his reasoning just happens to lead him to what he already believed. It is my understanding that any true agnostic using this method of doubt would go in circles like the dog chasing his tail.With each circle of reasoning he would end up with less and less faith until atheism all though not proven would seem the most probable truth. Descartes on the other hand seemed to go from his method of doubt straight to a theistic conclusion step by step with no missteps. I find this suspicious.

Sounds more like a method of faith. You start with your faith in God then pretend to doubt just so other skeptics will take your faith as actual reasoning. Many Christians today use this method in writing books that say they were once an atheist. Their writings fall down based on their misunderstanding of what atheism is. If you really were an atheist then you would know that atheism is a philosophy. Or more clearly a predisposition to non theistic philosophers/philosophies based not on prejudice but personal experience and an intelligent understanding of what philosophy is. Yet book after book is published and carried mostly by Christian bookstores claiming they once were atheist and how they lived a totally immoral life until some realization or dissatisfaction with that life led them to God. Who of course just happened to be the Christian God.

If you really chose atheism as just an excuse to be amoral and then became dissatisfied with an amoral life why not become a Jew? Jews believe in God. There is your meaning. If you claim all you need is God for meaning Judaism should be enough. Or why not Buddhism ? Buddhism teachings are all about compassion leading to enlightenment. With Buddhism amoralism is impossible. You can be an immoral person but not without conflict and if you want enlightenment you have no choice but to eliminate this conflict with mindfulness and compassion. So why do all these writers live such immoral lives and coincidentally find Jesus instead? To me it is obvious they are not being intellectually honest with themselves or with us by saying they were once atheist.

All atheist suffer the pains of agnosticism. Not pain necessarily from Pascals wager or or Christian Theism. Christians are not the only belief system with a concept of God.

A real atheist will study theism deism pantheism etc before making the commitment from agnostic to atheist. And a real agnostic would never be able to use their doubt to get to God. Only faith gets you to God. Doubt takes you to reality instead. I guess I am saying Descartes was a liar. Either he was a theist playing with words or he was an agnostic hiding behind theism to get published. Either way he misled people to believe he had proof of God and that this was more important then any honesty inquiry into the nature of metaphysics. Can any one offer some good internet links to substantiate or challenge my claims? Does any one here have a opinion on whether I have a point?

Consumer Culture As A Form of Pornography?

compassion, consumer, consumerism, culture, education, equality, gender, materialism, media, men, money, politics, pornography, power, sex, sexism, society, values, wealth, women

I am writing a book on pornography with the premise that true pornography is any form of media that distorts men and women into predator and prey (Aggressor and Victim) Whether it be an adult film showing a woman to be used or a horror flick showing her as a victim and therefore sexy But even romantic comedy shows women as victims who need a man with money to validated their worth as a sex object

So my question is this. Is there a connection between the way feminism has been absorbed into a patriarchal materialist society and porn ? There are now women producing porn but for the most part it has not softened in to erotica The bottom line is money Has our materialist society corrupted feminism so that woman are fighting for equality to pursue money and power? Are these not male values? And the worse male values at that?

Why should women settle for equality as defined by the top 1% of soulless males that worship power We need your healing feminine energy to balance out the overly male energy There are other values besides wealth power and competition that take just as much strength if not more to add to our a society as appreciated values

We need to learn feminine strengths such as compassion openness vulnerability and many others (Some that can not be put into words easily) These traits that are encouraged in women are discouraged in men because they are seen as weaknesses The problem is that feminist do not want to be seen as weak so a lot of them accept our societies rules for what is a strength or a weakness and what should be valued.

I for one would like to start an organization of men who have power unfairly due to our societies unequal playing ground who will be willing to join their power to women who are struggling feminist who are trying to empower themselves

The goal of such a group would be

1. To balance out the playing field for both feminine and masculine values

2.Eliminate gender roles all together as well

3.Create other options besides male dominator ones to influence our politics or economic structure education system etc

Am I too much of a dreamer ? Or does anyone else want to see this new world I envision? Perhaps I should wait a thousand lifetimes reincarnate and ask again?