When it comes to Nicholas of Cusa and Rene Descartes and their ideas of the infinite, the differences are many while the similarities are few. Nicholas of Cusa, who lived from 1401 to 1464, recognized the open-ended, positive aspect of nature which later led him to view the infinite as a never-ending circle; a changing and developing circle that is. In contrast, Rene Descartes, who lived from 1596 to 1650, struggled with trusting whether or not the world even exists outside of the private ego—to him, the two were blended. Descartes, later, came to the conclusion to use his own knowledge in proving certain aspects of the infinite, which would, in a way, strengthen his arguments. Despite their different approaches and ideas, in general, of the infinite, these two philosophers came to find important realizations of human nature and the world around them. An important aspect of Nicholas of Cusa’s findings was the “coincidence of opposites.” In that experiment, Cusa imagines a circle that continues to be stretched so wide, it becomes a straight line.
…show more content…
In the end result, is the idea that the circle “is a figure of how we may think beyond limited things toward the transcendent One” (Miller). Cusa puts a large emphasis on the transition from individualism to God and the relationship from God to the universe in it’s entirety. In terms of the universe, Cusa views it as being infinite, but in the sense of it being unbounded physically, it is forever growing and continuing (Miller). Within the infiniteness of the universe, is the infinite value placed on God. Since God created individuals, those individuals are the images of God, so they too, share a certain value among themselves. Of course, individuals, humans, do not have a divine perfection like God, but since they come from God, they possess a certain amount of potential and significance amongst themselves. Doubting everything around him, was the tactic Rene Descartes used when confronting the infinite. Descartes would doubt everything from his physical being to nature, until he realized he was completely sure of one thing: he was thinking. When doubting everything, Descartes was able to use logic as a way to reach an answer. He would prove everything he possibly could, starting with the fact that he was for sure thinking, which would lead to him further doubting the world around him, but allowing him to know at least one thing for sure. “A thing that thinks… A thing that doubts, understands, affirms, denies, wills, refuses, and that also imagines and senses” (Descartes 66). With his doubting, he was able to come to better conclusions about everything surrounding him, helping his case of the infinite. Through the process of doubting, Descartes came to the topic of God and even doubted the existence of God. Was nature created by a good God or an “evil genius” (Descartes 71)? After further contemplation over the existence and form of God, Descartes recognized the perfection held by God, but was further puzzled by how an imperfect being as himself could imagine a divine perfection. Descartes comes to the conclusion that God created his imperfection, but it is within that imperfection that it can be proven that God is not only perfect, but infinite. In comparing Nicholas of Cusa and Rene Descartes, there was an obvious difference in
In the end result, is the idea that the circle “is a figure of how we may think beyond limited things toward the transcendent One” (Miller). Cusa puts a large emphasis on the transition from individualism to God and the relationship from God to the universe in it’s entirety. In terms of the universe, Cusa views it as being infinite, but in the sense of it being unbounded physically, it is forever growing and continuing (Miller). Within the infiniteness of the universe, is the infinite value placed on God. Since God created individuals, those individuals are the images of God, so they too, share a certain value among themselves. Of course, individuals, humans, do not have a divine perfection like God, but since they come from God, they possess a certain amount of potential and significance amongst themselves. Doubting everything around him, was the tactic Rene Descartes used when confronting the infinite. Descartes would doubt everything from his physical being to nature, until he realized he was completely sure of one thing: he was thinking. When doubting everything, Descartes was able to use logic as a way to reach an answer. He would prove everything he possibly could, starting with the fact that he was for sure thinking, which would lead to him further doubting the world around him, but allowing him to know at least one thing for sure. “A thing that thinks… A thing that doubts, understands, affirms, denies, wills, refuses, and that also imagines and senses” (Descartes 66). With his doubting, he was able to come to better conclusions about everything surrounding him, helping his case of the infinite. Through the process of doubting, Descartes came to the topic of God and even doubted the existence of God. Was nature created by a good God or an “evil genius” (Descartes 71)? After further contemplation over the existence and form of God, Descartes recognized the perfection held by God, but was further puzzled by how an imperfect being as himself could imagine a divine perfection. Descartes comes to the conclusion that God created his imperfection, but it is within that imperfection that it can be proven that God is not only perfect, but infinite. In comparing Nicholas of Cusa and Rene Descartes, there was an obvious difference in