Rene Descartes’ Discourse on Method was written with the premise in mind that there is a sequential approach to guiding one’s reason in order to maximize certainty of knowledge and discovery. Using an autobiographical method, Descartes deliberately does not push his method upon the reader, nor frame it as the best and only method that exists. Using an explanatory model, and detailing his exact thought process throughout the Discourse, he allows the reader to follow him on his journey and decide for themselves whether his method is right for them or not. Part I of the Discourse of Method begins with a proclamation of faith that all men have the same potential for “good sense,” or reason, and that the difference between thoughts and opinions
…show more content…
Instead, individuals within the city might choose to tear their house down and rebuild it themselves (¶ 2). This can be read in such a way that Descartes is advocating not to tear down the liberal education system, but calling upon individuals—his readers—to find their own certain knowledge using experience, reasoning, and the theoretical knowledge and various skills attained from their liberal education.
Descartes then introduces his method to tearing down such houses within the context of one’s imperfect city. The first step was to doubt everything that one once thought was certain, unless there is a way to be certain that the piece of knowledge in question is, indeed, certain (¶ 7). This must be done without introducing bias, so as to get the clearest conclusion about whether the piece of information can be doubted.
The second step of Descartes’ method was to parse each problem he encountered into as many parts as possible (¶ 8), so that he may analyze each part independently of the larger problem. This could be equated to compartmentalizing today, which allows one to solve a large problem by finding solutions to each of its small parts …show more content…
In this way, Descartes discovered, or rather, created, a foundation upon which to build every other aspect of his knowledge. It is worth mentioning at this point that none of this would have been possible without his liberal education, which he had addressed in Part I and the beginning of Part II, even if indirectly.
Descartes’ belief that a theoretical, liberal education is not sufficient or certain directly relates to his assertion that one must become a master and owner or nature (Part VI, ¶ 2). One can achieve this by scientific inquiry, which is methodical. When one has completed the method and has a solid foundation to place all of one’s knowledge upon, one then has the means to conquer the mysteries of nature, thus becoming a “master” of it. This requires both the theoretical model in liberal education as well as a practical philosophy to apply to real life and tackle the mysteries the whole of nature
Instead, individuals within the city might choose to tear their house down and rebuild it themselves (¶ 2). This can be read in such a way that Descartes is advocating not to tear down the liberal education system, but calling upon individuals—his readers—to find their own certain knowledge using experience, reasoning, and the theoretical knowledge and various skills attained from their liberal education.
Descartes then introduces his method to tearing down such houses within the context of one’s imperfect city. The first step was to doubt everything that one once thought was certain, unless there is a way to be certain that the piece of knowledge in question is, indeed, certain (¶ 7). This must be done without introducing bias, so as to get the clearest conclusion about whether the piece of information can be doubted.
The second step of Descartes’ method was to parse each problem he encountered into as many parts as possible (¶ 8), so that he may analyze each part independently of the larger problem. This could be equated to compartmentalizing today, which allows one to solve a large problem by finding solutions to each of its small parts …show more content…
In this way, Descartes discovered, or rather, created, a foundation upon which to build every other aspect of his knowledge. It is worth mentioning at this point that none of this would have been possible without his liberal education, which he had addressed in Part I and the beginning of Part II, even if indirectly.
Descartes’ belief that a theoretical, liberal education is not sufficient or certain directly relates to his assertion that one must become a master and owner or nature (Part VI, ¶ 2). One can achieve this by scientific inquiry, which is methodical. When one has completed the method and has a solid foundation to place all of one’s knowledge upon, one then has the means to conquer the mysteries of nature, thus becoming a “master” of it. This requires both the theoretical model in liberal education as well as a practical philosophy to apply to real life and tackle the mysteries the whole of nature