Defending Descartes:
A Textual and Philosophical Analysis of Descartes’s Cogito Ergo Sum
Regarding every fundamental philosophical quandary, including questions of epistemology, morality, ontology, and axiology, there are leaders of the major movements to answer these questions. These are often the most memorable and sound arguments of the time, or the most influential on the ideologies held today. Rene Descartes is certainly one of these aforementioned philosophers. In his Meditations on First Philosophy, Descartes explores many subtopics in the overarching theme of metaphysics, defined by Oxford Dictionaries as the branch of philosophy that deals with the first principles of things, including abstract concepts such as being, knowing, substance, …show more content…
Descartes begins his foundational claim with the first meditation, subtitled “Concerning Those Things That Can Be Called into Doubt”, in his Meditations on First Philosophy. The purpose of this meditation is first and foremost establishing philosophical skepticism. “Several years have passed since I first realized how numerous were the false opinions that in my youth I had taken to be true,... And thus I realized that once in my life I had to raze everything to the ground and begin again..if I wanted to establish anything firm and lasting in the sciences.” (MP, p. 40). He seeks to determine the irrefutable, self-evident facts, if any exist. Descartes plans to methodologically and rationally find doubt, meaning that there must be a reason and a process with which to doubt. In its modern iterations, this notion is referred to as foundationalism or internalism. The structure of Descartes foundationalism focuses on two points, the first of which states that if something passes the skeptical test it is a self evident truth, one beyond doubt, while the second furthers the notion that these self-evident truths are inherently true. In his writings, Descartes provides three rationales for doubt, the argument from sensory illusion, the argument from dreaming, and the argument from God’s omnipotent power. (Classnotes W2). In practice, Descartes skepticism would appear in a structure similar to, “If I know that P, i must know that -P is not true. I do not know whether P or -P is true. Therefore, I do not know that P. This is to conclude that my knowledge of P is not justified” (PP slide 10). Descartes concludes his opening meditation with a relevant quote about continuing this vein of knowledge into further philosophical arguments, and a refusal to lapse back into previous behaviors. “But it is not
A Textual and Philosophical Analysis of Descartes’s Cogito Ergo Sum
Regarding every fundamental philosophical quandary, including questions of epistemology, morality, ontology, and axiology, there are leaders of the major movements to answer these questions. These are often the most memorable and sound arguments of the time, or the most influential on the ideologies held today. Rene Descartes is certainly one of these aforementioned philosophers. In his Meditations on First Philosophy, Descartes explores many subtopics in the overarching theme of metaphysics, defined by Oxford Dictionaries as the branch of philosophy that deals with the first principles of things, including abstract concepts such as being, knowing, substance, …show more content…
Descartes begins his foundational claim with the first meditation, subtitled “Concerning Those Things That Can Be Called into Doubt”, in his Meditations on First Philosophy. The purpose of this meditation is first and foremost establishing philosophical skepticism. “Several years have passed since I first realized how numerous were the false opinions that in my youth I had taken to be true,... And thus I realized that once in my life I had to raze everything to the ground and begin again..if I wanted to establish anything firm and lasting in the sciences.” (MP, p. 40). He seeks to determine the irrefutable, self-evident facts, if any exist. Descartes plans to methodologically and rationally find doubt, meaning that there must be a reason and a process with which to doubt. In its modern iterations, this notion is referred to as foundationalism or internalism. The structure of Descartes foundationalism focuses on two points, the first of which states that if something passes the skeptical test it is a self evident truth, one beyond doubt, while the second furthers the notion that these self-evident truths are inherently true. In his writings, Descartes provides three rationales for doubt, the argument from sensory illusion, the argument from dreaming, and the argument from God’s omnipotent power. (Classnotes W2). In practice, Descartes skepticism would appear in a structure similar to, “If I know that P, i must know that -P is not true. I do not know whether P or -P is true. Therefore, I do not know that P. This is to conclude that my knowledge of P is not justified” (PP slide 10). Descartes concludes his opening meditation with a relevant quote about continuing this vein of knowledge into further philosophical arguments, and a refusal to lapse back into previous behaviors. “But it is not