Abstract Descartes' "The First Meditation", subtitled "What can be called into doubt," opens with a Meditator reflecting upon the volume of falsehoods he has believed during his life and on the subsequent shakiness of the body of knowledge he has built up from these falsehoods. He has resolved to clear away all that he thinks he knows to start anew from the foundations, reconstructing his knowledge once more on stable grounds. "Meditations", Volume 1 focuses upon the skepticism of a man confronting the instability of his perceptions of reality and upon life itself. He questions his senses, wrestles with deciding upon the Deific or Satanic origins of his deception and ultimately determines that he cannot doubt the reality of his own existence. It is the purpose of this paper to examine the nature of Descartes' skepticism relating to the "First Meditation", and to demonstrate the fallacy of his argument.
Abstract This paper argues that Descartes' "Trademark Argument" can only be a sound argument if all the premises are true leading to a true conclusion; thereby, all the premises must be 100% true and there is no argument within an argument. The author points out that there is a problem in the first premise because Descartes says he has this idea of a perfect being but he doesn't mention anything else besides the fact that he has this idea of something perfect. The paper contends that Descartes' actually trying to prove that there is a God is just ridiculous because the author feels that God's existence is supposed to be based on a belief system; there are many religions held by many types of people in the world, and every religion seems to have their own God and own story behind how the world became into existence.
From the Paper "The first thing Descartes said in his argument was, "I have an idea of a perfect being." Well his perfect being he is referring to is supposed to be God. Since Descartes' whole goal of this argument is to prove the existence of God, this was probably a good start to the argument. He kept it simple, and short without too many details. Once he had this idea, he probably might have been thinking how this idea came to him, which brings up the next premise in his argument."
Abstract This paper provides a brief introduction to Descartes's arguments from "Mediations" and provides some common criticisms of Descartes's philosophy.
From the Paper "Descartes dream argument is based on his assumption that humans accept any information that comes in from the senses as true. In his dream argument, Descartes proposes that the sensations that he feels in reality are greatly similar to those sensations that he feels while dreaming. As such, there is no reliable way to tell the difference between sensations felt during dreams and those felt while awake."
Abstract This paper argue that Descartes' argument of the mind having ascendancy over the body is correct from a scientific point of view. The author points out that the mind is made up of electrical impulses and energy is essentially infinite. The paper agrees with Descartes ultimate conclusion although some of Descartes methods for arriving at that conclusion are not considered valid.
From the Paper "In this essay, I argue that Descartes' argument of the mind having ascendancy over the body is correct. Speaking strictly from a scientific point of view, of course, Descartes is correct. The body is flesh, and therefore finite. The mind, however, is made up of electrical impulses and energy is essentially infinite. Therefore, long after the body has gone the impulses that made up the mind will have converted into another form of energy and still exist in our world's system."
Abstract This paper examines Descartes dualist thesis that mind and body are different things and his "Conceivability Argument" in his Meditations on First Philosophy. The conceivability argument uses one's ability to conceive of a mind without a body as a proof that mind and body are necessarily different things. The writer provides an objection to this argument from the point of view of an Identity Theorist, who believes that mind and body are in fact the exact same thing. The objection takes the meaning-reference distinction approach that states that mind and body essentially refer to the same thing but mean different things.
From the Paper "One of the central pieces of Descartes' dualist thesis is his conceivability argument, which attempts to establish that mind and body are necessarily different types of things. As it provides grounds for substantiating that mind and body are distinct, this argument also serves as the backbone of a prominent objection to the claims proposed by the simple identity theory. The identity theory makes the claim that all types of mental states and experiences are equivalent to types of brain states or other physical states. This clearly conflicts directly with the dualist's view of an independently existing mind that is responsible for the realization of mental states and experiences regardless of the existence of any corresponding physical entity to go with them. As such, the dualist must have significant objections to the identity theory. One such challenge to the identity theory is well summed by a single claim: "I can imagine myself turned to stone, and yet having images, aches, pains and so on." In this paper I will first demonstrate how an objection to the identity theory centered on this claim can be constructed. I will demonstrate how this objection is quite similar in nature to Descartes' conceivability argument, which will necessitate a brief explanation of Descartes' argument. I will then offer a response from the identity theorist to this objection, which will rely on the relationship between "concept" and "meaning" and the distinction between meaning and reference. In presenting this reply, I will show that this response to the dualist's objection also works against Descartes' conceivability argument."
Abstract This paper first outlines Descartes? argument for the existence of God as set forth in Meditation V. The writer then addresses the two most prominent objections to this argument: First, Kant's objection that Descartes' argument is valid but unsound because it contains a false premise, and second, Caterus? objection that the argument is invalid because the conclusion does not logically follow the premises.
From the Paper "Having established that clear and distinct perceptions are true, Descartes then asserts that he has a clear and distinct perception of God. ?Clearly the idea of God, that is, the idea of a supremely perfect being, is one I discover to be no less within me than the idea of any figure or number.? (M., 368) Additionally, this perception of God includes the concept of existence. ?It is obvious to anyone who pays close attention that existence can no more be separated from God's essence than [a triangle] having three angles equal to two right angles, or that the idea of a valley can be separated from the idea of a mountain.? (M., 369) Descartes then combines this concept with his first premise to complete the argument. Since clear and distinct perceptions about the nature of a thing are true, and the idea of existence is inextricably linked with the idea of a God, Descartes concludes that a God must therefore exist."
Abstract This paper describes Rene Descartes' use of Aquinas's five ways of knowing that God exists, identifying God's perfection as the major thrust of Descartes' ontological argument in defense of God's existence.
From the Paper "Rene Descartes in the Third Meditation draws upon arguments advanced earlier by St Thomas Aquinas to demonstrate that God exists. Having declared himself to be a thing that thinks that is to say that doubts .."
Tags:Descartes, Thomas Aquinas, God, First Prime Mover
Abstract David Hume was an undeniably brilliant philosopher who, at times, suffered in his writing the inability to adequately express his actual philosophy and thoughts. One of his most stunning arguments was, in actuality, a refutation of the Skeptics, a movement started in great part by Descartes, who attempted to convince Aristotelian philosophers that our experiences with the world are based solely upon our senses and, as such, our senses and thus our perception of the world and reality can be deceived. Therefore, the skeptic encourages us to question the validity of trusting only our senses for our knowledge of the world. While Descartes' and the other Skeptics' arguments were and continue to be the stuff of philosophical cliche (the "prove you exist" argument) the truth is that, as David Hume points out, there is no real point in pondering whether or not we actually exist. The fact of this futility is proven in the very real problem in that if we assume that the universe is the individual creation of just the "I", then the very same person is also taking on the role of God, which, according to Hume and others like him, is an impossibility. The ultimate end of the Skepticsargument, if you follow it to its logical conclusion, is that it is possible that all of us are the creation of some one person's imagination and that, as such, our existence is subject to the whims of one person's perception of reality and the self. Hume's argument, that such skeptical investigations of reality and the actuality of the self is pointless, is one which has a great deal of validity. But, there are counter arguments to his counter-argument, and in the interests of a full academic exploration of his philosophy, it is necessary to explore some of those arguments. It is the purpose of this paper, then, to examine three problems found in Hume's argument and to demonstrate that the exploration of reality from a skeptical point of view is nothing more than an exercise of thought, one that can ultimately only lead lead to psychological diagnoses of breaks in sanity rather than a treatise on our actual reality.
Abstract This paper examines Renee Descartes' "Meditations", and explains that within this writing, he justifies his faith in reason by a circuitous route. The paper explains that Descartes accomplishes this by first raising all of the epistemological doubts of skeptics - and then vindicating his faith in reason by advancing an argument for trusting certain aspects of our rationality. In the process, as far as he is concerned, he manages to: ... "tear down everything and begin anew from the foundations [in order to] ... establish ... firm and lasting knowledge". The paper then goes on to argue that contrary to establishing his faith in reason, to a very large extent, the new foundation that Descartes erects, and pins his firm knowledge on, is his certainty of the existence of God.
Abstract In this article, the writer shows that George Berkeley successfully refutes Descartes' argument that material objects have an existence separate from the mind and ideas. The writer maintains that Berkeley introduces systematic doubt, the same way that Descartes does. But instead of concluding that God is a deceiver, he proposes that perception must necessarily be imperfect. The writer discusses Berkeley's belief that material objects exist in the mind of God, and there can be no existence apart from perceiver and perceived. The writer concludes that Descartes' argument concerning the deception of God is a fallacy and that Berkeley successfully refutes Descartes' proposition.
From the Paper "In the process of systematic doubt Descartes shows that every part of phenomenal reality can be doubted, except the native mind that thinks, because doubt itself implies thought. At this point Descartes is certain of only one thing, and that is his own mind that thinks and doubts. The next step is to consider the ultimate creator of this mind, which must be a perfect being, because any imperfection will necessitate a further creator of less imperfection. The mind does not create itself, because it doubts, and therefore is imperfect. From this Descartes establishes the existence of God, as the Creator and the most perfect being. Because His nature is of the highest perfection, Descartes deduces that God is not a deceiver. From a parallel strand of argument he has established that the mind perceives material objects clearly and distinctly. Taking the two arguments together Descartes concludes that material objects must have existence."
From the Paper "In his Meditations, Descartes puts aside all his present beliefs and, by using skepticism, he attempts to discover a set of basic beliefs whose truth is beyond doubt. Descartes uses his dream argument to explain that our senses are not powerful enough to determine which beliefs are true and which are not. In his Second Meditation, through the use of skepticism, he derives his first basic belief, his own existence. "
Abstract This paper explains that the skepticalarguments of the First Meditation avoid doubting rational belief and knowledge. This paper states that the belief in God is an important part of Descartes? defense of dualism and presents itself as a truth in the First Meditation. The author believes that Descartes makes several statements that would lead one to conclude that it is possible just to know things versus knowing things for certain.
From the Paper "In the argument from dreaming, it is possible to doubt composite things in the dream, but he states that he cannot doubt the simple and universal parts from which they are constructed such as shape, quantity, size, and time because these are derived from real experience, much like paintings that draw on real things. Therefore, we cannot doubt studies based on simple things such as arithmetic and astronomy, but can doubt studies based on composite things such as medicine, astronomy or physics."
Abstract This paper discusses how Descartes does not accept valid proof for his existence. It explains how, in the process of questioning whether or not he exists, Descartes displays a pattern of reasoning, which proves the validity of the initial question because it arrives at a response that does not just act as proof for his existence ,but as a definition for human beings.
From the Paper "Descartes was a doubter, a skeptic whose philosophy emerges from his quest for the truth and his struggle to attain knowledge. As far as he was concerned, there really were no empirical truths but only a set of beliefs which, if they were born out by inquiry and logical testing, became truths. Within this context of doubting all until that all, or its different components, proved to be true knowledge ad reality, Descartes doubted all that was around him. Among the many tings that Descartes doubted was the reality of his own existence. If one were totally honest, one would admit that the first reaction to the idea of someone doubting whether or not he existed, is madness. We know we exist because we can see and feel ourselves."
Abstract Rene Descartes, in his Meditations on First Philosophy, addresses a wide variety of questions, from nature of the self and perception, to the demonstration of the existence of the world and of God. However, his argument in these Meditations begins at a point of radical scepticism concerning the existence of the universe and the nature of reality. Central to this argument is the idea of Cartesian dualism, or the separation of rational intellect from the body and the senses. In this context, this paper will argue, through a examination of various facets of Descartes' argument, that in the final analysis Meditations on First Philosophy retains a measure of this scepticism in its refusal to accept the position that knowledge may be acquired by the senses. 4 pgs. Bibliography lists 1 source.
