Descartes Dream Argument

Superior Essays
To meditate is to abandon all previous experience and knowledge in order to build from the ground up. The purpose of this is to prove that all conceptions are absolutely true by specific claims. This theory does not believe that what was known prior came from the senses, because there may have been doubt. Philosopher René Descartes was the original advocate for this type of rational thinking. Born in France, Descartes is known as the foundation of modern Western philosophy. His book, Meditations of First Philosophy, aims to show that the real source of knowledge comes from the mind, rather than the body or senses, creating his own scientific method. There are three points that Descartes focuses on in Meditations, each arguing against the position …show more content…
Since humans know that external objects exist, this type of knowledge can be only available through the mind. Descartes’ dream argument states, physical perceptions are similar in sensation while one is dreaming. Also, that there are no definitive signs to differentiate between when one is dreaming and when one is conscious or awake. Descartes argues that it is possible for a person to be dreaming in any given moment, and for all of their perceptions to be untrue. He believes that sensation cannot dictate certainty in a situation, as illustrated by the dream metaphor. The simplest principles in dreams such as color and nature are not questioned, but the meditator must doubt the correlation between real life and a dream sequence. Through intellect and reason we decide what is true and what is false, according to Descartes, and the dream argument identifies this theory. The next argument he uses to influence his universal doubt is that of the deceiving God. Descartes states that most people believe in an almighty power, God, who created man and is the most powerful. Since God is the most powerful, he has the ability to deceive us in matters of mathematical knowledge that are the most basic to comprehend. God has this …show more content…
The argument of the thinking thing can be countered and is not a clear claim. It is even unknown whether Descartes had in mind to draw a logical inference: he says that the conclusion that I exist from the fact that I 'm thinking is a self-evident perception of my state of being. The statement of, “I think, therefore I am”, is truly disguised. Your existence creates your ability to think and come to intuitions. When you doubt why you are thinking or why you have the ability to think, than you are becoming irrational. Certain people have intuitions or need concise reasoning. Either way, the person’s existence came first and then they came to a conclusion in their mind (thinking) that they need more reasoning or not. Descartes states that we can be deceived from an objective thought, but not the fact that we exist and seem to perceive certain characteristics. If we can be deceived from a thought, isn’t deciding if we exist or not, a thought as well. Therefore, this thought of realizing you exist due to your intelligence is false because the very recognition of that thought creates doubt that it was deceived. The cogito example points to the mental act of thinking one 's own existence. The cogito creates a flash of self-perception and not a rational step from a point A to point B. The very fact of thinking gives me special access to my being, knowing that it is too evident to

Related Documents

  • Great 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
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    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…

    • 1192 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    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…

    • 1114 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Verificationism is the “idea of the things that exist is just our idea of what we can observe” (pg. 15). This argues that reality is merely what we can observe, as opposed to the other views previously mentioned, which both doubt the legitimacy of the external world. Verificationism is an individual awaking from a dream and being able to distinguish when dreaming, and when hallucinating. It also states that if each person has a different perception of something they saw, there is no accurate perception of anything in reality.…

    • 759 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The idea of developing perceptions proves to only lead to untruthful projections of reality. The human ability to envisage such thoughts are the source behind this unreliability, since once stimuli is received humans begin to perceive. What is seen and heard may not always…

    • 724 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved 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
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Some people get so caught up in their beliefs that they are blind to investigating their belief for good reason. In the case of some people, emotions and thoughts control their beliefs and that overpowers the duty to find good reason. While it is wrong to hold an unsound belief it is also immoral to act on these beliefs, as the ship-owner did in the example. Once someone believes something their ability to evaluate the belief becomes harder. Clifford’s central idea that a belief is not morally correct because of the issue of right or wrong but rather if the belief had been founded on proper grounds or if it was entertained on improper grounds is displayed in the text through fictional…

    • 706 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    If they are wrong and I am wrong is there another point of view, we haven’t examined yet? It is a hard concept to use in an actual argument, in the end it definitely helps. Arguments are inedible, not always are people going to agree, but is the job of the arguer to decipher if the argument is a fallacy. In an argument with a person using fallacies on the opposite end, they do not care what the other persons points of views are. They want whatever the discussion is to benefit themselves.…

    • 1577 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    This is part of the distorting effect of the human mind because it cannot retain the first impression, but instead, it begins to degrade into an “idea.” An idea is one way in which the individual’s mind distorts the experience by inserting their own past experie4nces over the initial impression. This is one way to explain the validity of Hume’s argument based on these additional aspects of the human thought: “It is impossible, therefore, that any arguments from experience can prove this resemblance of the past to the future; since all these arguments are founded on the supposition of that resemblance” (Hume para.8). Therefore, the premise of present and future tense define the dilution of an impression over time, which defines an important evaluation of how individual experiences can distort…

    • 1134 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Great 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
    Great Essays