Rene Descartes Meditation Theory

Good Essays
Descartes’ main goal with his first meditation is to provide a new foundation of the sciences. He claims that the foundation of the sciences lies within our minds and is exclusive of our senses. To prove this theory, Descartes uses the method of logical doubt, in which he states “if I am able to find in each one some reason to doubt, this will suffice to justify my rejecting the whole” (Descartes, 6). This means that, if he can find the slightest doubt regarding a fact, he can therefore can conclude that it is not true. However, Descartes does not reject every single aspect, but rather the basic foundations. First off, Descartes starts by attacking our senses. Descartes says that our senses do not give us the absolute truth of things and could be deceiving us, “ the sense sometimes deceives us concerning things which are hardly perceptible…”(Descartes, 7). Descartes claims that our senses only give us the basic knowledge of things or objects, which can openly be doubted because we do not know if the objects really do exist by solely trusting our senses. Although Descartes says to doubt our senses, he emphasizes that the mental images of things …show more content…
A dream, according to Descartes, is composed of complex elements, while our imaginations tend to consist of simple elements. However, Descartes thereafter debunks this argument, due to his reasoning that we understand the simple elements, and his evil demon argument. For example, it is a commonly understood that 2 plus 2 is equal to four and that a square has 4 sides. These are evidences, however we do not know if they are absolutely true. Descartes argues that an evil demon or evil teacher could have put these ideas in our mind to make us think that they are true, when in fact they could be

Related Documents

  • Decent 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
    Decent Essays
  • Decent 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
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    2. The problem with Cartesian skepticism is that there is not enough evidence to prove that the world around us is always false. Descartes is trying to prove his point off of logic instead of actual evidence. Descartes is putting too much faith on the mind over the physical world. When he explains an evil being manipulating our thoughts and senses he still cannot prove that the evil being actually exists.…

    • 713 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    The default belief is that there is a single reality in which knowledge exists, if a critic argues against this, he or she would be saying that there is knowledge for the contrary, which is contradictory: their claim defeats itself. For either side of the argument to be fruitful in efforts, one side would have to have objective knowledge. Disagreeing has never been a sign that there is no truth at all. For example, few doubt the existence of some overarching moral code; they may disagree on the specifics of that code without finding that as lack of any code at all. If there were no objective knowledge, there would be complete chaos; there are so many things in the grand scheme of life that are universally agreed upon.…

    • 1153 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    In process of demolishing his previous opinions, Descartes denies things he recognized through senses. And he draws the conclusion that any of people’s belief can be doubtful (Descartes 2). In order to find the truth, Descartes supposes everything around him is fictitious, including assuming himself to be senseless. Then he begins to think about what remains true. He thinks and then doubts what he thinks.…

    • 1150 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    James’ theory would be effective at creating many new beliefs but his process does not emphasize the creation of true beliefs, as he desires. Without criticizing and discussing beliefs James’s idea of maximizing true beliefs is not accomplished. William James was a radical empiricist (James, Preface). He says “‘radical’ because it treats the doctrine of monism itself as a hypothesis, and, unlike so much of the half-way empiricism that is current” (James, Preface). James believed that there are multiple true experiences of a singular reality.…

    • 1421 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Therefore, Zhuangzi and Descartes have differing opinions on what is true knowledge and how many truths that are actually valid. Furthermore, both Zhuangzi and Descartes believed that skepticism could lead an individual to true knowledge, but in different ways. Zhuangzi believed that questioning knowledge that comes from traditions or authority, for example, one can find their own truth. However, Descartes believed that any doubt in the information proves it to be unreliable and that knowledge should be forgotten, which can lead to the single…

    • 775 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Such radical process has a purpose of inquiring and questioning our knowledge by looking at its foundation. If foundation proves to be doubtful, everything else collapses; thus leaving one to own device to decide what knowledge is genuine by using reason. Furthermore, Descartes strives to utilize skepticism as the mean to an end, that is, the doubting all our beliefs for the purpose of acquiring genuine knowledge. However, Descartes himself admits that it might be impossible to know all the truths, but at least the skepticism would help him to eject the false beliefs, replacing them with justified and certain…

    • 1490 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Name: Course: Institution: Date: Meditations on First Philosophy by Descartes: Failure of Descartes replies to his objections In ‘Meditations on First Philosophy' Descartes provides a true and certain foundation upon which to build a system of knowledge. According to Descartes, we can only guarantee our beliefs regarding a reality by limiting all what we believe to be indubitable. In his first Meditation, Descartes argues that the existence of a reflective thought should be the first principle of philosophy since it is indubitable (Descartes 2). He also argues that a person's ordinary experience of the world cannot be used to provide a guaranteed foundation upon which other knowledge can be based upon. The mediator reasons that he needs to…

    • 1501 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    He says, “I hesitate to burden my attention with those which are insignificant, which only a divine mind could illustrate”(4). Thoreau is saying that not only is society not adequate, but also, society does not possess the status or position that such an opinion requires. According to him, “only a divine mind”, has the right to speak out on what is an acceptable behavior. Although both have presented their outlooks in comparable styles, a contrast still stands. Both deem chastity of the mind important, but the way each of them conveys their…

    • 1491 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Decent Essays