Descartes Vs Cogito

Descartes comes to this realization from his state of total doubt after a final effort to locate an incontrovertible truth, asking firstly whether there is a God or other all-powerful being implanting his doubts. This line of thinking leads Descartes to question who truly conceives of his thoughts and doubts, then to question whether one necessarily cannot exist without a physical body (a concept he had

Descartes’ Meditations begin by the Meditator neglecting the existence of all material things and questioning his own existence. These metaphysical questions are aimed to establish a basis from which the Meditator, Descartes, may then build a basis for a clear conception of not only his own existence but also the existence of matter or material things. This then follows into Descartes description to the interaction of mind and matter. Descartes’ distinction of mind and matter begins in the Meditation II. Descartes’ “cogito” is the first distinction of mind from matter.

In Wiggins’ case of fission he undermines the belief that all questions of personal identity must have answers. The belief when asked in response to brain division is found implausible. According to Parfit, ‘If all the possible answers are implausible, it is hard to decide which of them is true, and hard even to keep the belief that one of them must be true’. (1971, p.8) He also undermines the second belief that personal identity plays a part in survival.

Fact of the matter is that there are no new objections, you have hear them all before Now how do you handle objections, what are the rules, are there any ? First things first, you never win an argument by proving him wrong, even if he is. Even if you are right about pointing about something he has stated, which may not be true or right, you need to do it politely & softly. You cannot hurt his ego, pride, status, knowledge level and win it.

The Divine Command Theory (DCT) explains which actions are moral based on whether or not God commands it. The theory is difficult to support due to its flaws, arbitration, and even due to the essence of God. While Divine Command Theorists may completely support this theory, I will argue why the theory is impractical and cannot dictate what is morally right or wrong. In understanding if this theory holds ground we must question what God commands. Instead of uncritically accepting a theory we must put it to question and eliminate any flaws.

Doubt and Skepticism are essential components that set up their methods of reasoning, and without their doubt and skepticism I probably wouldn't be discussing them right now. Through reflection and meditation Descartes and Augustine refine doubts, through their to-be-explained methods. By reflecting they come to a better understanding of the self, which causes them to definitively question the existence of God. Through which they come to reasoned knowledge of God which brings them to a culminating understanding of themselves, and their

1) This essay aims to firstly analyse and explain Descartes’s God argument in Meditations three, specifically on the idea that perfection precedes imperfection. Then I will introduce possible oppositions to his view and attempt to defend it from his position. Lastly, I will provide my own view pertaining to his argument. Firstly, the idea of perfection here is an assumption of God’s trait that also relates to being infinite.

The next step that Descartes uses in the second meditation is the existence of this Godly figure. He questions his own beliefs with that of the God, and argues that a mind should be capable of thinking for them to be of existence, “Is there not some God, or some other being by whatever name we call it, which puts these reflections into my mind? That is not necessary, for is it not possible that I am capable of producing them myself?” He then puts forward that for one to be deceived by this “evil demon” as he describes it, they have to exist to be deceived.

Good and Evil Are not Real The concept of good and evil is one of the most foundational apothegms ever known to humankind. It was a crucial stepping stone for other morals, and it is what averts society from pandemonium, by providing structures for laws. But, one may ask oneself; where did the conceptualization of good and evil arise? I believe that good and evil does not exist and are entirely artificial.

To ask such a question, however, does not produce a change of context according to Moore. Nor does it show the context of sensitivity of knowledge, let alone the relativity of knowledge to different standards of evaluation. On the contrary, it depends on an invariant concept and raises another question. Not if we know that p, but rather how one can prove that p is known (if it is true). Moore, moreover, agrees that he cannot answer such a question.

Descartes starts The Meditations by regarding all knowledge as deception imposed by a deceptive God. He does this in an effort to rid himself of any possible falsehood, so that he can attain what he can rebuild his reality with only what is deemed to be certain. Eventually he disregards the notion of a deceptive God, and is able to regain with confidence many of his previous convictions. The first step he takes in his search for truth is to identify whether or not he exists. After some analysis he concludes that he must exist, because he is able to question his existence.