Differential Knowledge Essay

1470 Words 6 Pages
If one is not able to differentiate between his dreaming state and his conscious state, then I agree with Descartes' claim that he cannot attain knowledge that derives from his senses. Because experiences in vivid dreams are no more than one's imagination at work, it would be wrong to consider them as more than false beliefs. And, as it is the case that false beliefs are not sufficient grounds of knowledge, Descartes intends to show that true beliefs are doubtable in which equivocates them to false beliefs, and therefore any doubtable belief is not pertinent, vis-à-vis., knowledge. In short, without being able to doubt or deny beliefs that derive from the senses, Descartes' argument does not stand. And here is where I intent to …show more content…
Here the word "certainty" appears repetitive together with the word "know"; my intention is to show that these words are synonymously used for the purpose of this paper.

Although Descartes appears argue in favour of the skeptic view by initially denying knowledge of anything, this is simply the starting point of his argument. That is to say, by denying all knowledge, he is able to break down everything that we claim to be knowledge, and, to reiterate, rebuild it. In addition, by arguing in favour of the skeptic view, Descartes is able to shed light on the weaknesses of the skeptic's argument, because, ultimately, Descartes intends to discredit the skeptic view. Thus, to put it more formally, his intention is to critically distinguish between what we know and what we do not know. From his distinction, he infers four general concepts: we know that we exist or, more specifically, Descartes knows that he exists; we know that God exists; we know physical objects exist; and finally, the rules of mathematics are knowledge.

Descartes begins his denial of knowledge by doubting some of his beliefs that he once held to be true; more specifically, beliefs that once acted as grounds of knowledge. As he is able to show that these once thought to be true beliefs are indeed false, he is able to infer that if a true belief is doubtable, then in regards to it being a foundation of knowledge, it is equivalent to a false

Related Documents