Descartes And The Wax Argument Analysis

1044 Words 5 Pages
The second meditation continues Descartes search for one main concern of how he cannot be certain of anything. He has reached the conclusion of a clearer understanding of the physical world and how it comes from the use of judgement and reason, as opposed to relying solely on what ‘appears to be the case’ through perception of the senses and use of the imagination. Ultimately, then, I think the true nature of things in the external world are not revealed fully. How do I really know what is for certain? Descartes uses the analogy of wax in which deals with how we perceive objects and their characteristics and he uses wax because of it 's ability to change these qualities quite easily. Descartes heats up the wax and it melts until it has changed …show more content…
This example has also given me to challenge and the opportunity to gain knowledge. My question that I asked myself, what is really real in life if everything is based off of what we see? What is true? I agree with Descartes because he explains the wax argument to overcome the problem of ideas thought up by the imagination. If we see wax in its initial harden state, it has certain properties such as hard and yellow. When the wax melts, it becomes a liquid and a different color. Should we trust our senses? From our class conversations, I realized that this was not just a piece of wax, but how I have prior knowledge of things. I find that my truth shows through my senses because it has guided me down my path of knowledge and learning. He concludes that our mind does not comprehend things with senses which give us information about appearance of things, but our mind understands those things by essence. Descartes has to take on the question of God’s existence. He does this because God cannot be comprehended through senses. It could be as simple as not taking a job in a certain city because of its bad reputation or judging someone new I have just met by even getting to know them first. I have discovered through Descartes second meditation that I can have a better understanding of everything through my intellect and how much easier and certain of my own knowledge rather than just based off of the …show more content…
I think this is essential to the way we live and communicate with the world outside of us and even inside our bodies. Even though Descartes questions his senses in his meditations, he does this because he was trying to get a new insight in his mind by switching the way he thinks. Descartes says the best knowledge comes from the judgement of mind not our senses. I see where he is coming from on trying to get a new perspective on things, but for him to conclude that all ideas that come from senses are not trustworthy doesn’t make sense to me. How can I make judgements without my senses? What can I really trust then? I find myself disagreeing with this because I would not have all the knowledge that I have without the use of my senses. My senses are what I believe gives me life, physically and psychologically. My perceptions on life are constantly changing and sometimes even being tricked, for example, recognition of objects far in the distance will change when I move closer. Does this mean I should question my senses? The way I view things can change, but that doesn’t mean I don’t trust

Related Documents