Descartes Meditations Analysis

934 Words 4 Pages
In this paper, I will provide an analysis for one of the celebrated arguments by Descartes written in the Meditations. The challenging argument presented by Descartes is the argument from ignorance, which is precisely claimed in his First Meditation. Moreover, the skeptical argument requires for one to know that the present external world is not a dream in order to have knowledge that an external world exists. Otherwise, one does not really know that an external world exists. As noted, this argument of logical possibility presents difficulties when attempting to provide a satisfactory answer to avoid the questioning of the entailment of what one knows. However, Barry Stroud and Elizabeth Wolgast provide different approaches to answer and understanding of the paradigm established in the argument. The context of the argument from ignorance that Descartes proposes is problematic when attempting to answer it . In Wolgast’s perspective, the argument from ignorance claims that the knowledge that one is not dreaming is a necessary condition to determine the existence of the external world. Under such circumstances, Wolgast claims that by considering ‘know’ as a necessary condition, then it becomes more difficult to provide evidence that will suffice the skeptic— …show more content…
The argument from ignorance presents difficulties that simply place into question one’s confidence when answering a vague question. Wolgast and Stroud demonstrate the improper context and meaning of the argument, in which we are forced to provide an answer. However, if the answer provided has any correlation with our knowledge obtained through the senses, then it is not a satisfiable answer. Similar to the example that Stroud’s example, if one attempts to provide an answer by using a method (e.g. a test tube)—assuming that knowledge is a necessary condition—then such proof would

Related Documents