In Meditations on First Philosophy written by René Descartes, he offers a formulation that as long as I am thinking, I must exist. And the meaning of “I” turns out to be “a thinking thing” (4). However, I come up with a different idea. I am thinking because I already exist instead of that I am thinking; therefore, I exist. It makes a difference because thinking of something only proves the process exists.
In the second meditation, Descartes holds the idea that thinking proves a person’s existence. In particular, when a person is thinking of something, maybe the thing is not true, but the process of thinking about it does exist. In the first meditation, Descartes cast doubts on the surroundings, and he finds that things he knows through senses …show more content…
In process of demolishing his previous opinions, Descartes denies things he recognized through senses. And he draws the conclusion that any of people’s belief can be doubtful (Descartes 2). In order to find the truth, Descartes supposes everything around him is fictitious, including assuming himself to be senseless. Then he begins to think about what remains true. He thinks and then doubts what he thinks. Since he is thinking, he questions his own existence. As a result of his thinking, he concludes that “if I convinced myself of something then I certainly existed” (4). But when we stand at the angel of being doubtful like Descartes, what does “I” mean? Then, he gives the answer that “A thing that thinks” (5). To be more specific, “I” represents thought, which directs us to be skeptical, deny, agree, desire, imagine and make reactions to things (Descartes 5). In other words, “I” refers to spirits. Afterwards, he realizes human minds is easier to recognize than substance (Descartes …show more content…
In the first meditation, Descartes is struck by the fact that things he recognized before are possibly wrong, which has a huge impact on his contributions to science (Descartes 1). He explains the reason in the beginning, “I realized that if I wanted to establish anything in the sciences that was stable and likely to last, I needed—just once in my life—to demolish everything completely and start again from the foundations” (1). Since ideas which cannot bear close analysis are not convincing in science, it is significant for Descartes to find the truth. On top of that, in Descartes’s narrative, “whatever I have accepted until now as most true has come to me through my senses” (1). And senses sometimes deceive us. Generally speaking, most of us learning things by judging through senses which are not very accurate, mentioned by Descartes. Therefore, for the majority of people, it is also vital to determine what to believe and not. Besides, in the following part of the article, the claim helps Descartes find what “I” is, which gives readers a clear and unique definition of who ourselves actually are-a thing that thinks, raising consideration. The most important is that through the proof of what exists, Descartes find a more general way to perceive things. According to Descartes conclusion, bodies are perceived through intellect and being understood (Descartes 9). In other words,
In the second meditation, Descartes holds the idea that thinking proves a person’s existence. In particular, when a person is thinking of something, maybe the thing is not true, but the process of thinking about it does exist. In the first meditation, Descartes cast doubts on the surroundings, and he finds that things he knows through senses …show more content…
In process of demolishing his previous opinions, Descartes denies things he recognized through senses. And he draws the conclusion that any of people’s belief can be doubtful (Descartes 2). In order to find the truth, Descartes supposes everything around him is fictitious, including assuming himself to be senseless. Then he begins to think about what remains true. He thinks and then doubts what he thinks. Since he is thinking, he questions his own existence. As a result of his thinking, he concludes that “if I convinced myself of something then I certainly existed” (4). But when we stand at the angel of being doubtful like Descartes, what does “I” mean? Then, he gives the answer that “A thing that thinks” (5). To be more specific, “I” represents thought, which directs us to be skeptical, deny, agree, desire, imagine and make reactions to things (Descartes 5). In other words, “I” refers to spirits. Afterwards, he realizes human minds is easier to recognize than substance (Descartes …show more content…
In the first meditation, Descartes is struck by the fact that things he recognized before are possibly wrong, which has a huge impact on his contributions to science (Descartes 1). He explains the reason in the beginning, “I realized that if I wanted to establish anything in the sciences that was stable and likely to last, I needed—just once in my life—to demolish everything completely and start again from the foundations” (1). Since ideas which cannot bear close analysis are not convincing in science, it is significant for Descartes to find the truth. On top of that, in Descartes’s narrative, “whatever I have accepted until now as most true has come to me through my senses” (1). And senses sometimes deceive us. Generally speaking, most of us learning things by judging through senses which are not very accurate, mentioned by Descartes. Therefore, for the majority of people, it is also vital to determine what to believe and not. Besides, in the following part of the article, the claim helps Descartes find what “I” is, which gives readers a clear and unique definition of who ourselves actually are-a thing that thinks, raising consideration. The most important is that through the proof of what exists, Descartes find a more general way to perceive things. According to Descartes conclusion, bodies are perceived through intellect and being understood (Descartes 9). In other words,