Sophie's World By Joseph Gaarder: A Philosophical Analysis

Improved Essays
How would you feel if everything you encountered in life, you were apprehensive about? Most people would consider you paranoid or eccentric, but this was exactly what the philosopher Descartes was accredited for. In Sophie’s World by Joseph Gaarder, Descartes is one of the philosophers discussed and one who I dissented with. I comprehend his way of thinking, but I do not necessarily agree to it. Descartes’s thought development followed a series of points I disagreed with – senses may not be reliable, there are two classifications of reality, and a perfect entity has to exist being as the idea is already in the mind.
When Descartes was theorizing on how the mind influences the body, he declared human senses cannot be trusted seeing as they can
…show more content…
God would not be deceiving so Descartes decided an outer reality must exist, but it is a separate form of reality than the reality of thought. He was a dualist asserting that thought and extension (matter) are independent of each other – “’As long as the mind is in the body, he believed, it is linked to the brain. . . where constant interaction takes place between “spirit” and “matter”. . . But the mind can also detach itself from such “base” impulses and operate independently of the body’” (238; ch. 18). When attached to the body, the mind is affected by feelings, but it can also detach itself for reason to be in command, and this is where I did not understand Descartes’s point. If the mind can rise above the material world then what exactly is thinking or doing the reasoning? My view is that a body or some physical object has to be present in order for a rational thought to occur. If there is no such entity existing, then I am not sure how there would be a stream of thought available; therefore, his reasoning perplexes me. He was the one who coined the expression “Coigto, ergo sum” which translates into “I think, therefore I am” and it is how Descartes assumed he was a thinking being. This phrase makes it sound as if something exists because deliberating is occurring. Thus, if the mind is separated from the body, then the question is …show more content…
This notion comes from the idea of a flawless entity Descartes had in his mind, so he deduced the image must have come from God, who is a faultless entity. Sophie had the same thought I did – just because I have a concept in my mind does not necessarily designate that it exists in reality. I feel as if Descartes’s rebuttal is fallible considering he says “’. . . it is not inherent in the concept of a crocophant that it exists. On the other hand, it is inherent in the concept of a perfect entity that such an entity exists’” (236; ch. 18). His logic is reporting that the crocophant does not exist by virtue that a person is not born with the idea of it, but the person has the idea of a supreme entity from the start of his life. This blemishes his logic because it is not necessarily true every person believed in God in his times, just like not everyone believes today. This would be assuming infants are born with an image of a divine being, but those who do not believe lose this image because how else would it explain why some people do not believe. Also, he presumes only one God exists, yet other cultures believe in multiple Gods, and they do not view their Gods as perfect. For example, the Greeks were a polytheistic culture, and the myths about their Gods did not always portray them in the best light and highlight them as blameless. Descartes also gives the example that it

Related Documents

  • Improved Essays

    Ryle is suggesting you accept his explanation of why dualism commits a category mistake on the grounds of non dualistic ontology! Although he does argue that the original language explaining dualism is wrong. The way Ryle is critiquing dualism is problematic because for one to build a case against dualism based on beliefs external to dualism is inaccurate. Ryle continues to flip flop between internal and external terminology. Ryle objects to using the term “inside” to describe mental happenings because to do so would require the process to be observable in some sense.…

    • 1496 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    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.…

    • 1114 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Great Essays

    Second is that the consciousness is also affected by internal things of desire and despair. This concludes that the mind can adapt or evolve that through the current present this change can occur with different stimuli. Although the argument for exists is still questionable there is a lot more direct evidence to prove through naturalism that the existence of the self has a reasoning thinking thing that is conditional to the universe and its laws. Now also mentioning the fact that there can be internal constraints, as well that effect and can cause continual effects, which directly affects the self. This point was first documented by, Mortiz Schlick a Philosopher who wrote “When Is a Man Responsible” according the secondary author Schlick mentions the constraints of “mental illness and neuroses” are causes that effect or constraint the minds “functions and natural tendencies” (Chaffee 180).…

    • 1985 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    It is something you are subjectively determining. With that in mind each individuals view on dualism differs slightly, as the properties are often determined subjectively. Essentially Descartes says that he can doubt that his body exists, this comes from his distrust of senses and perception. Whereas he can’t doubt his mind due to the fact that he is always a thinking thing. But whether or not he can doubt his body and or mind is all dependent on him.…

    • 1034 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    In the Three Dialogues between Hylas and Philonous, Berkeley wants to deny the existence of matter as a thing independent of the mind, because he thinks that this kind of belief supports a sceptical view of the world (9). It follows then, that we can only know the world through our mental perceptions, and there cannot be any experience of reality independent of the way we perceive it. For example, we do not know a chair’s existence without having some kind of sensible relation to it, be it by vision, touch or even smell. However, some materialist philosophers are of the opinion that that chair’s essence is in fact distinct from our perceiving it. They believe that the chair possesses, and is composed of something that is unknown to us (Morrison,…

    • 770 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    However, additionally, it is vulnerable. The opposing argument towards Descartes’ theory can easily be built by a simple question that is how the mind and the body react. That Descartes does not have an answer for that question is the weakness of his argument. He does not pay attention to what makes up a mind. The mind cannot just be there and has no foundations.…

    • 905 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Descartes utilizes the word conceivable as in it is intelligently applied in this way not self-conflicting that he can exist without his body. This is on the grounds that it is conceivable to imagine something being broadened and non-considering. Likewise, it is conceivable to imagine something being non-broadened and being a reasoning thing. For instance, we can imagine my mind considering yet having no spatial fleetingness. God can make a world where whatever is possible is magically conceivable in light of the fact that everything which I catch plainly and unmistakably can be made by God.…

    • 724 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The objective world, though is logically supposed to exist, has already been distorted by human body and mind. Science and reason seem to stop at the boundary of empirical world, outside which human resort to imagination or some transcendental factor like religion…

    • 920 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Sartre was part of a group of philosophers called the ‘Existentialist’. He was also an aggressive Atheist who didn’t mind speaking his mind. Most of Sartre’s philosophy is in opposition to other well-known philosophers and their ideas. In particular he argues against Kant’s distinction between things we appear to see despite what the reality actually was and the sense data we gained from events as our mode of understanding. Also, even though he had claimed to be a phenomenologist, Sartre was openly in disagreement on several topics with Husserl, the father of phenomenology himself.…

    • 1245 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    As I mentioned just before, the time is not corporeal, and that is, the time does not exist, but the fact that we can perceive and tell about the time indicates that the time also has a consistent existential formality as ‘a thing’. The very ‘a thing’ is incorporeal and although it does not exist, we could not say it is totally nothing or completely does not exist, so the Stoics say it…

    • 886 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays