Meditations of First Philosophy
Author: DescartesDescartes
Rene Descartes
Background Info
1596-1650
educated at Univ of Paris
Catholic Christian
not an academic
wrote [[Descartes, Meditations of First Philosophy]] from a [[Rationalism
rationalistic]] perspective
claims he is making a whole new start in philosophy
D. arrived at a certain and evident knowledge of the truth. He wants to see if he can persuade others by the same method that he himself used.
...
Why does Descartes makes these arguments? Some of the things that he knows are wrong, and he wants to know which ones.
![[Descartes#Background Info]]
Summary of the Argument
- I exist as an imperfect, thinking thing
- "a thing that doubts, understands, affirms, denies, wills, abstains from willing, that also can be aware of images and sensations." (p. 36)
- I cannot trust my senses
- I am not perfect (complete), but because I know that, I also know that perfection must exist
- God must have made me, along with the idea of God
- Since I can conceive of a perfect thing, but I am not myself perfect, that idea of a perfect thing must have come from something outside of me (God)
- all ideas have to come from something that is as perfect as it is
- the idea of a perfect God could not have come from my imperfect mind
- but do I actually have the idea of a perfect God in my mind, or do I only think I do?
- God is "a substance that is infinite, immutable, independent, all-knowing, all-powerful, and by which I myself and everything else…have been created"
- Since God is perfect, he cannot deceive (deception is a defect; argument from the Middle Ages)
- I am dependent on God for conserving me
- God has given us reason; used well, it will not lead us astray
- but because our will > our understanding, we err
- Things clearly + distinctly apprehended = True
- involuntarily experience senses & more vivid than imagination
- so the source must be external, & must be real (if effect, then cause)
Notes
- What does Descartes not doubt?
- Descartes doesn't doubt ReasonReason
Reason
reason is the "natural light" [[Descartes]]
what is the difference b/t reason & thinking?
what is thinking?
processing information?
in this case, can an animal think?
what is reason?
a type of thinking?
can you only accept what has been proven by reason?
reason is like a telescope: it lets us see things clearer; but it must have ...- he thinks that reason is an effective way to find truth
- does he realize that he's assuming the effectiveness of reason, or is he unaware of that?
- Doesn't doubt that he thinks
- Doesn't doubt that a perfect being cannot deceive
- Descartes doesn't doubt ReasonReason
- Is fully skeptical of Sense PerceptionSense Perception
Sense Perception
You can be good at sensing w/o being able to explain how.
You can be skilled in using your senses & have them still make mistakes sometimes
Cartesian Circle
is this a valid critique of Descartes' method?
- everything (reason) relies on God not deceiving us
- but D. proves God through reason
Proof of God's existence
- uses the ontological argument
- That Than Which No Greater Can Be Thought
- it is better to be than not to be (?) how do you mean by "better"?
- medieval perfection = completedness
Summary
Meditations 1-3
In his search for truth, Descartes first set aside any foundations or things he previously assumed, choosing instead to rely on pure ReasonReason
Reason
reason is the "natural light" [[Descartes]]
what is the difference b/t reason & thinking?
what is thinking?
processing information?
in this case, can an animal think?
what is reason?
a type of thinking?
can you only accept what has been proven by reason?
reason is like a telescope: it lets us see things clearer; but it must have ... and only first premises that he could not reject. He did discard the evidence of the sense, citing dreams as an example of when he seemed to be sensing things that were not actually happening. He went further discussing the senses, eventually concluding that the senses do not properly tell anything; the mind is what cognizes bodies. Then he made a strong argument that GodGod
God
Christian God
Epistemology of God
Ockham warned that rational philosophy cannot presume to define a being that transcends the empirically based intellect
[[Descartes]] affirmed God's existence through reason, but was unconvincing to [[Hume]] and [[Kant]]
can God be known through experience and/or reason, or can we only know (about) him through faith?
maybe God is thinkable, but not knowable [[Kant]]
Greek Deities
based in myth
myth crossed over into histo... must exist by saying that all ideas come from sources which are as good or better than the ideas themselves. Since the idea of God is better than man, the idea of God must have come from God himself. Finally, Descartes contemplated his beginning, and concluded that God had created him and sustained him. God must be the ultimate cause in the universe.
Meditations 4-6 Descartes bases a lot on the claim that since God is perfect (which he proved earlier), God cannot deceive, because deception would be a defect. But then if God did not wish him to be deceived, how could he ever make mistakes? He makes the claim that his understanding does not make mistakes, but it can be incomplete. Also, he does have a free will. When that free will makes decisions based on an incomplete understanding, that is when he makes errors. Descartes then argues for the existence of the physical, corporeal world: since the senses present images that are more vivid than his imagination could conjure up, it must follow that his senses are telling him the truth. At the very least, even though he cannot trust his senses entirely, he does admit that he should not doubt everything they tell him. Finally, he concludes by stating the division between body and mind.