Descartes 'Dream Argument'

575 Words3 Pages
Descartes ‘Dream Argument’ is the idea that as there is no way to tell one's dreams from one's waking experience, because they are phenomenologically identical (Meaning they have the same epistemological and cognitive value); senses cannot be trusted. Descartes arrives at this conclusion because he believes that he had often confused the dream world with the waking, as he dreams that, “that I am here in my dressing-gown, sitting by the fire” showing that one cannot trust knowledge gained through the senses if they are so easily deceived by dreams. In theory, one would be inclined to believe what Descartes presents, if one couldn’t verify the validity of an experience one would logically reject the things the experience relies on as a valid source of knowledge. However, one can tell when they are dreaming or not, hence Descartes has no ground to stand on in saying arguing this. Descartes explicitly states that there “are never any sure signs by means of which being awake can be distinguished from being asleep”. While one can understand where Descartes is approaching from, arguing that in the moment of a dream one cannot tell they are dream may only apply to those who dream about mundane things (as Descartes apparently does). In reality, dreams are not at all like the waking world. Dreams lack…show more content…
In response to this I offer a further example: when in the throes of a nightmare one's rational mind reports that it is impossible for one to be being murdered in Cornwall, when one just lay to bed in Surrey. These logical inconsistencies show the dreamer the experience is not real and they are in fact asleep.Thus showing dreams as distinguishable from reality, either in the waking world or within a dream, if one pays attention and so Descartes is not successful in arguing that dreams are evidence for the lack of validity in sensory
Open Document