So Descartes is still going off of assumptions to prove his theory. He tries to resolve this problem by doubting everything around us in the physical world. Descartes proposes that if we doubt everything, the only thing we can be certain of is that we are alive (in the mind) because we can think (I think therefore I am). He has three propositions…
Descartes argues that there are varying degrees of reality. At the bottom, there are Modes that depend on finale substances for their existence (the color of a chair or a shape). Above the modes are Finate Substances, including us, trees, and tables. At the top are Infinite Substances or God. Each type must come from somewhere as you cant get something out of nothing.…
Descartes tries to make sense of the existence of God by using Adequate reality, the belief that an idea must have as much formal reality as it has objective…
Along with his axioms, Descartes was really interested in math. He would look for truth in the inputs and the outputs that he was classifying as bad on both sides, he would look at them in a mathematical way. He stated that mathematics was a form of knowledge. Alongside of his axioms, he uses three very similar arguments to open our knowledge to doubt: the deceiving God argument, the evil demon argument, and the dream argument. Each one of these ideas represents that we never experience external object directly, but only through the matters of our own mind and the images that are created.…
(16) The idea of God also cannot be invented by Descartes himself because if he was the inventor, he would have the ability to add or take away anything to the idea but this idea doesn’t permit interference. (17) So the only cause of the idea remaining is that it is innate, having to come within Descartes’s own self. Descartes then uses the causal adequacy principle which claims that any idea that has representative reality must come from a cause that contains at least as much intrinsic reality as there is representative reality in the idea.…
We must doubt what we know, to achieve a better understanding of everything around us. Descartes believed in our ability as humans to think, and to question what we know to attain knowledge. He brought up the objections to his doubts, and explained them thoroughly. His theories came full circle, and supported his premises. Depicting the difference between reality and imagination seems like an unchallenging task, yet it’s complexity changes when doubt is brought into the equation.…
In his other papers, Descartes speaks of being a methodological skeptic. Being a methodological skeptic is attempting to eliminating all possible false beliefs and then from that basis, gaining only true beliefs. By claiming that he is uncertain that his sense experiences may be false is a huge step towards this skepticism. He then contrives through logical reasoning that it is the case that he is a existing entity that has the ability to think. These beliefs, to Descartes, are beliefs that are proven to be true and cannot be proven otherwise, making these beliefs impervious to any methodological skeptical doubt.…
Moreover, Descartes believes that ideas do not just sprung coming from nothing, that there is something producing that idea. Having thought about this idea situation, Descartes makes two principles of it: 1) there has to be reality in cause and effect and 2) there has to be considerable formal reality in the cause of an idea just as objective reality in an idea. An infinite objective reality idea is being the idea of God. Descartes conclude that the infinite formal reality (God) is the one who produces his ideas; thus, God exists. Descartes uses clear and distinct perceptions to prove God’s…
In his second argument, Descartes believes that he exists as something with an idea of God and everything that…
Searle and Descartes being separated by nearly four centuries provides a rough landscape for a philosophical discussion to be conducted upon. Both Searle and Descartes have inherent biases based upon their location on the timeline, Searle with modern science and Descartes with religion and the church. Being that the two are opposed, I think that Searle is able to articulate effectively his positions and respond to Descartes’ claims properly. If positioned at the same location along the timeline and granted the knowledge that Searle possess, I think that Descartes, assuming he had an open mind, would agree with Searle’s propositions and subsequent conclusion.…
Introduction The argument whether or not the mind and the body are distinct substances raises a still on-going debate. In this essay, I proceed to give evidence as to why the Cartesian dualism theory is flawed. First, I am going to introduce a few of Descartes’ arguments and his position on the matter. Then, I will try to pick his most appealing argument and put it up against logical reasoning and other philosophers’ viewpoints. Finally, I am going to conclude how Rene Descartes proposes fallacious arguments which object his mind-body problem.…
Something which can be difficult to distinguish when reading the Meditations is whether Descartes is talking about truth in its purest sense or reality. In the second meditation, he argues that when looking to establish truth we need to accept that we exist otherwise we cannot judge the truth in anything else. But this can be confusing as he is relating truth and reality and equalling them to each other. If Descartes here, is referring to the idea of reality he is arguing that for us to judge the reality of anything else, we must admit that through our ability to think for ourselves and rationalise, we must be real. However, if he is referring to truth, then he is using the truth of our own thoughts to rationalise the truth of all else.…
The argument in Descartes’ Sixth Meditation for the real distinction between the mind and the body ultimately secures his dualist position. Despite his argument appearing to make some mildly questionable leaps and seemingly ignore one potentially devastating point altogether, his position is clear and strong. I will begin by reconstructing Descartes’ argument, cover the grievances listed above, and then hope to argue that, despite these objections, Descartes’ position remains a sound metaphysical view. In the Sixth Meditation, Descartes begins by declaring that, firstly, all things one can clearly and distinctly perceive can be created by God, and secondly, if one can clearly and distinctly perceive one thing without calling to mind another,…
He creates this way of thinking that senses can change over different phases and ideas cannot just disappear from our minds. He is right about the fact of changing the matter of an object and still having that idea of what that particular object was before it was changed is from your mind. He gives valid reasons, however he has many weaknesses to his argument. In the textbook, Classical Philosophical Questions, Descartes says that “…if an idea is “clear” if its content includes the nature and essence of it” (195).…
Descartes goes into questioning whether his existence is valid since all of our surroundings and understandings can be undone with doubt. This is hyperbolic doubt, the beginning of methodological doubt which is a technique Descartes believes we should use to rid ourselves of inaccurate thinking. He poses the question of how do we know that we exist if we cannot depend on our sense and math if there is a being that can deceive us every step of the way and leaves the physical world as nonexistent were that the case. With this, he reckons that even there is a deceiving demon, the fact that he can think cannot be denied and declares it as “cogito ergo sum” or “I think, therefore, I am” (Meditation II). To affirm existence is to be able to think, even if we do not have a body which encompasses all the senses that could be deceived therefore making it impossible to exist.…