Descartes Meditations On First Philosophy: An Analysis

In the sixth meditation, Descartes postulates that there exists a fundamental difference in the natures of both mind and body which necessitates that they be considered as separate and distinct entities, rather than one stemming from the other or vice versa. This essay will endeavour to provide a critical objection to Descartes’ conception of the nature of mind and body and will then further commit to elucidating a suitably Cartesian-esque response to the same objection. (Descartes,1641)

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.

In Meditation 3, the Meditator is creating arguments about the existence of god. This is where Descartes explains different reasons/premises to why god exists. Throughout Meditation 3, Descartes goes back and forth with his arguments arguing one thing then creating a counter argument to it at while still focusing on the main thing which is does god exist. For those wondering whether god does really exist stay tuned into what Descartes says. The premises from the meditation that claim god doesn’t exist are weak and invalid, and fail to give enough evidence to support the thought that god does not exists, which would conclude that God does exist.

In Descartes’ third Meditation, Descartes aims to prove God’s existence. So far, he only knows a couple of things with certainty. He knows that he exists, because he knows that he is a thinking thing, and that he has ideas or sensations in his mind. Because he clearly and distinctly perceives that he is a thinking thing, he is certain of that fact. He wouldn’t be able to be certain unless all clear and distinct perceptions were certain, so it is in the first couple of paragraphs that Descartes concludes that whatever he perceives as clearly and distinctly must be true. Descartes sets aside his senses and his images of bodily things before commencing his argument for the existence of God.

Thus, God does not cause our errors in judgement, instead it is from a lack of perfection. (from 7 and 8)

Descartes presents an argument for how we know that we exist. It is difficult to question something we don’t know because we don’t know where to start. If there is an answer, there is a question, however if humans do not exist, there would be no one to question their

Descartes in the first chapter introduces the idea of radical skepticism. He argues that he will revise everything that he learned from the childhood for accuracy. Everything must be called into question because it is the only way to gain knowledge. The beliefs are questioned and attempts to

“I think, therefore, I am,” a syllogism turned symbolic by repetition. Descartes’ signature phrase, stated in the search of a proper base for the pursuit of knowledge and as a result of a project of radical self doubt, this basis was founded. A project of radical doubt ranging from his

Descartes gave a few arguments that God exists and is real. Desocrates believed our idea of God is that God is a perfect being, he believed he is more perfect to exist than not to exist. Desocrates also believed that God is a infinite being. Descartes idea would be that God gave us this idea to type this paragraph about him so he must be real. When he thinks negative of an idea or thought he wonders if an evil demon plotted those thoughts. If demons exist, so must God. Descartes believed God will not allow any evil demons to deceive anybody. We can not be for certain if God had a reason to teach humanity a lesson or allow an evil demon to do that

Rene Descartes famously argues, in First Meditations, the first section of his larger work, Meditations on First Philosophy, that it is unwise to trust something that deceives you, even once. Descartes continues by claiming that because the senses are known to deceive, be it through optical illusions or through dreams, it is imprudent to trust one’s senses. G.E. Moore responds to Descartes’ radical argument in his academic essay, Proof of an External World. Moore asserts, “I can prove now, for instance, that two human hands exist (24).” He executes this claim in an astonishingly simple manner. He simply holds up each of his two hands and says, as he makes certain gestures with the right hand, “here is a hand,” and, as he makes an additional gesture with the left hand, “here is another [hand].” Since he was able to wave both hands, and assert their existence verbally, Moore is now convinced that two hands exist in the world. To clarify, in this paper, external means anything outside of consciousness; for, in Descartes’ Second Meditation, he claims that the only thing he can know with absolute certainty is: I possess consciousness, or in his words, “I am, I exist.” Based on Moore’s above ‘proof,’ he draws the conclusion that if two hands exist, then the external world must exist as well, because hands are inherently external. In Moore’s view, this, and this alone stands as proof that things outside of his consciousness exist, any additional examples would be repetitive and

Upon reading Pascal and Descartes, I found their stance on the existence of God very interesting, and different. Whereas Descartes follows on his notion of, “I exist, therefore I am”, and by reason he is able to understand that God exists, Pascal takes different approach, claiming that we cannot know such a finite thing. In Pascal’s Wager, he claims that we must choose to believe whether or not there is a God. In this essay, I will discuss how Descartes’s influenced Pascal’s thinking. I will first outline Descartes’s argument for the existence of God. I will then outline Pascal’s wager and argue that it is in response to Descartes’s philosophy on God. {Further, I will compare and contrast the emphasis of rhetoric between these two philosophers, and argue that Pascal moves toward a hermeneutic perspective in his Art of Persuasion.} Finally, I will discuss whether or not Pascal’s perspective and emphasis on context prove to hold more firm in his arguments than Descartes’.

Rene Descartes’ statement, “I think, therefore, I am” laid the foundation for his Cogito Argument in the Mediations. Throughout his groundwork we come to interpret that “I think, whatever thinks, must exists, so I exist, and whatever exists is a thing, so I exist as a thinking thing”, and so he knew this with certainty. In the mediator’s search for certainty, Descartes had to disregard anything that was doubtful or wrong. He chose to lay a new canvas and threw away all his previous knowledge and understanding to start anew. And so, from here, Descartes searched for facts he knew with certainty. In order for his opinions and knowledge not to interfere with his perception, he chose to doubt everything. And so, he even chose to doubt the existence of the physical body and continued to stay

Rene Descartes is a French Philosopher of the 17th century, who formulated the philosophical Cogito argument by the name of ‘cogito ergo sum,’ also known as “I think, therefore, I am.” Rene was a skeptic philosopher amongst many scholastic philosophers at his time. He took a skeptical approach towards the relations between thoughts and existence, to interpret his cogito argument as indubitable and whether it could serve as a foundational belief.

One of the biggest fundamental questions in philosophy has to do with ourselves and what exactly makes us, us. What makes a person a person?

Rene Descartes is considered as one of the most important founders of modern day philosophy. His greatest contribution to philosophy is his meditations. This paper aims at establishing what wax represents in Descartes meditations.