René Descartes Argument Analysis

René Descartes’s argument in the Second Meditation of Meditations on First Philosophy, normally referred to as the Cogito, after its Latin formulation cogito ergo sum (‘I think, therefore I am’), is arguably the most famous one in all of philosophy and can be considered as origin of modern philosophy. His premise ‘I am, I exist’ (p.21) , which he ambitiously sets out to prove in this Meditation, does not explicitly take this form though. His meditation is thinking about thinking and affirming that thinking equals being. This essay will present and analyse Descartes’s argument in detail and explain that one can be sure that the ‘I’ exists and what the ‘I’ is. Then, it will examine how one comes to know the true nature of an object. To illustrate the latter, an example will be provided. In addition, possible counter arguments will be provided and …show more content…
Descartes starts off by concluding that the existence of the body is an illusion and the senses do not exist either. It must now be demonstrated that one can exist, even though one has no body. The meditator states that he ‘has convinced [him]self of something’ (p.21). It was possible for him to convince himself of the fact that ‘nothing is certain’ (p.20). However, one can raise the question if there exists a deceiver, which tries to mislead the meditator. This would mean, that the perception of one’s existence is false and the result of the deception. However, even if there is a deceiver in form of God or an evil demon, it must be true that there has to be an ‘I' which can be deceived; one has to exist, in order to be misled. Thus, even if an omnipotent and supreme deceiver does exist, ‘he will never bring it about that I am nothing as long as I think I am something’ (p.21). It follows in conclusion that ‘I am, I exist’ is ‘necessarily true whenever it is put forward by me or conceived in my mind’