Analysis Of Rene Descartes First Meditation

Better Essays
Rene Descartes believes we should be skeptical of our sense perceptions. He is a rationalist and believes we are born with innate ideas. Although others are imperialist, like John Locke, who oppose this idea and state that all knowledge is based from sense perceptions. Through Descartes’ “First Meditation” he goes through a line of reasoning with three key arguments. There is an objection to Descartes argument that innate ideas can be unaware of. Descartes’ argues that one has to be skeptical of one’s sensory experiences. This is due to knowledge based on sensory perception is only based on the senses. He claims that we must not trust our senses, “But it is sometimes proved to me that these sense are deceptive, and it is wiser not to trust …show more content…
These thoughts are then not true. This evil deceiver could be putting perceptions in our head, what we believe, what we think, everything we believe to be true. This evil deceiver has to be taken into consideration, therefore, everything we know must be thrown out. Including, mathematics and God. What seems to be left is self, “‘I am, I exist’” (Descartes). In other words, I think, therefore I am. The subject is doing the thinking, so it must have consciousness. This self-conscious is then a necessary truth. Although a evil deceiver has to be considered to find necessary truths, Descartes claims there is no such evil deceiver. There is only a infinite all good God. Since there is an all good God, this God would not try to deceiver us. Thus, Mathematical statements can be concluded as an necessary truth again because there is no evil deceiver deceiving us. Descartes comes back to the conclusion that I, God, and mathematics are necessary truths. Due to them being necessary truths, they must be innate ideas. Self perceptions are allowed back, with carful consideration and multiple cautions. All other sciences and imperial ideas are allowed back in to …show more content…
If everyone had these innate ideas, then these they should be known by everyone. It seems that, “it is evident that all children and idiots have not the least apprehension or thought of them” (Locke). Children, people with disabilities, and people from other cultures according to Descartes would have these identical innate thoughts, although evidence shows that they do not. Descartes could respond that everyone has these innate ideas, but are not consciously aware of them. Locke states, “it seeming to me near a contradiction to say that there are truths imprinted on the soul, which it perceives or understand not” (Locke). It does not make sense that innate ideas could be imprinted, but be not consciously aware of. Due to if there are impressions on the mind, they must be unavoidably able to perceive them and know these truths. It seems children don’t come into the world knowing mathematical equations and there is no universal agreement on the concept of God. This points even more towards the claim that there are no innate ideas. A response from Descartes could be that there is a lack of language abilities to articulate these innate truths. This may be true, but there is still a problem of innate ideas being in the unconscious and needing self reelecting or teaching to get them into the conscious. There is no clear distinction

Related Documents

  • Decent Essays

    Also, since knowledge consciously derived from the senses can be the cause of illusions, then sense experience itself can be doubtable. He does not trust his senses as they can sometimes deceive us and as he says himself, “it is prudent never to trust completely those who have deceived us even once” As a result, Descartes deduced that a correct pursuit of truth should doubt every belief about reality. Descartes developed a method to attain truths according to which nothing that cannot be recognised by the intellect can be classified as knowledge. These truths are gained without any sensory experience, according to Descartes. Truths that are attained by reason are to be broken down into elements which intuition can grasp, which, through a purely deductive process, will result in clear truths about reality.…

    • 1549 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Berkeley’s view on this is incoherent as it does not make sense as to why something cannot exist externally because we can only think of it through senses. A common claim for the existence of the mind is to say that we can sense that it is there. If that is the case, then it is not unreasonable to suggest that other objects and ideas exist on their own because we can sense them as well. A counterargument to this could be to say that we cannot perceive of our minds not existing, unlike other ideas. However, I can perceive of other peoples’ minds not existing as they can perceive my mind not existing.…

    • 1136 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    However, Descartes does not reject every single aspect, but rather the basic foundations. First off, Descartes starts by attacking our senses. Descartes says that our senses do not give us the absolute truth of things and could be deceiving us, “ the sense sometimes deceives us concerning things which are hardly perceptible…”(Descartes, 7). Descartes claims that our senses only give us the basic knowledge of things or objects, which can openly be doubted because we do not know if the objects really do exist by solely trusting our senses. Although Descartes says to doubt our senses, he emphasizes that the mental images of things…

    • 836 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Primarily, John Locke questions Descartes theory of innate ideas. Innate ideas, in Descartes eyes, cannot be learned by experience, but rather they are inbeded in everyone’s minds. These ideas include, God and mathamatics. When speakng about these ideas, Locke states, “But yet I take the liberty to say that these propositions are so far from having an universal assent, that there are a great part of mankind to whom they are not so much as known”. Locke claimes that people are not born with these innate ideas, but instead people start off with a blank slate, and they form ideas from sense perception and from reflection upon those senses.…

    • 1735 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    James’ theory would be effective at creating many new beliefs but his process does not emphasize the creation of true beliefs, as he desires. Without criticizing and discussing beliefs James’s idea of maximizing true beliefs is not accomplished. William James was a radical empiricist (James, Preface). He says “‘radical’ because it treats the doctrine of monism itself as a hypothesis, and, unlike so much of the half-way empiricism that is current” (James, Preface). James believed that there are multiple true experiences of a singular reality.…

    • 1421 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Donald Davidson and John McDowell both present responses to skepticism of the external world. Skepticism of the external world arises from the realization that our perceptions are fallible and that there is no real justification for believing that an external world exists over believing that we are all just in a dream. Davidson presents a coherence theory as a response to skepticism, stating that a belief about the external world, in this case, is most likely true if it is not contradictory with a significant body of beliefs (Davidson 307). McDowell criticizes Davidson’s theory and presents a new theory that says experience has conceptual content, and therefore can serve as justification for our beliefs (McDowell 26). There are many issues…

    • 1949 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Objectivism states that some moral claims are objectively true. One big difference between objectivism and nihilism is that objectivism depends on process of elimination rather than actual merits. It says that nihilism, objectivism, or relativism has to be true before eliminating nihilism and relativism as being false. This leaves only objectivism standing, so proponents say it must be true. While this is a strategic approach, it is not strong.…

    • 1071 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    As a moral anti-realist Mackie supposes that moral properties cannot exist independently of the mind. Anti-realism is an umbrella term for a range of theories, but Mackie specifically advocates moral error theory and so when he says that ‘There are no objective values’ he is stating that moral values and judgments aim at truth but fail. Therefore, statements regarding morality for example ‘murder is wrong’ despite the general acceptance are not true…

    • 1470 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    In the first Mediation “of the Things of Which We May Doubt” Descartes reflects on doubts, that his senses deceive him constantly, he cannot rely on them. He also goes on to say that he does not know when to or how to distinguish a dream to be real or fake; some dreams may feel real but in reality did not happen. Then last he has this “Evil Genius” that is the creator of our minds and thoughts. The evil genius can create doubts and dreams, therefore, how are we going to know if he exist? Leading to Descartes cogitatio “I think, therefore I am” he makes his points that the mind exists.…

    • 1644 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    This however contradicts himself and leads him to beg the question. The problem with the debate of Moore vs the philosophical skeptic is they both believe in different worlds. Moore believes in what could be called the "realistic world" whereas the philosophical skeptic believes in the "doubtful world". Intuitively, it goes against all of our senses to believe that such an external and "realistic" world does not exist. Moore is correct in describing our intuitions as the smarter bet, but because he tries to demonstrate his argument deductively, his "proof" is invalid.…

    • 850 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays