Abstract In this paper, Descartes' "Meditations" are subjected to critical analysis. The Fifth Meditation is discussed in relation to Thomas Hobbes' objections to it and the question is raised as to whether either of them have contributed anything significant here.
From the Paper "Someone once answered the objection that philosophy is too obscure for the layman to understand by observing that if the answers to the questions that have fascinated philosophers through the ages were obvious, they would have been .."
Abstract This paper discusses the nature of reality and the limits of consciousness and dreams by comparing and contrasting a principal philosophy text and a box-office hit movie, Descartes' "Meditations of First Philosophy" and the movie "The Matrix". It focuses on the theme that no human can really judge the limits of existence and knowledge, so therefore we cannot really be sure what is real and what is illusion.
From the Paper "For Descartes the primary debate is posed in his Meditation One, in which he illuminates on those things that can be called into doubt. He essentially doubts the separation between wakefulness and dreams because he argues that he experiences the same things in sleep that he does when he is awake. His primary example is that while he thinks he is awake because of all the things he is seeing and doing, "how often does my evening slumber persuade me of such ordinary things as these" (14). With this in mind, one cannot argue that dreams do not prove to have all the same basic elements that we know to exist when we are awake. "
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.
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 This paper discusses the concepts contained in Rene Descartes' Meditations on First Philosophy and investigates the different reasons why Descartes would assert that psychology is not a science like physics or other natural sciences. These concepts include that psychology is not made up of clear and distinct ideas, that it deals with the mind rather than objects, that human psychology is a reflex created by the interaction of the mind and body and that science requires that ideas be judged based on observation and experiments, something that psychology cannot achieve.
From the Paper "Meditations on First Philosophy is Descartes? attempt to question everything around him and determine what can really be accepted as truth and what cannot. The one sure thing this is based on is that Descartes exists. The reasoning is that if he did not exist, he would not be thinking about whether he exists and so, he must exist. This is captured by the phrase "cognito ergo sum" - I think, therefore I am. Based on this, Descartes accepts this truth and attempts to follow it to see what else he can know for certain. Descartes then reflects on the truths and finds one characteristic that links them all, they are all clear and distinct. Descartes? conclusion is that any truth made up of clear and distinct ideas can be known for certain."
Abstract This paper discusses Descartes' Cartesian arguments for the existence of God. The author points out the claims that this argument is flawed. The author structures an argument that will support our claim for scientific knowledge.
Abstract This paper argues that Descartes does not commit a vicious circle when he argues that the clear and distinct perception that a non-deceiving God exists and that clear and distinct perceptions are true because a non-deceiving God exists. It also reviews Descartes' arguments for clear and distinct perception with respect to God's existence in the third meditation as well as Descartes arguments for a non-deceitful God, also in the third meditation. Before synthesizing these arguments and showing that Descartes' theory of perception does not commit a vicious circle, the paper uses Descartes arguments in the fourth meditation to show that error in the mind's reasoning is not the fault of God, but the fault the mind's will or recollection.
From the Paper "So, the question now arises in the third meditation as to what has the ability to give the mind a clear and distinct perception of matter, if the mind cannot derive a clear and distinct perception of matter by referring to its own properties as a thinking substance. Descartes answers this question by stating, "I understand by the name 'God' a certain substance that is infinite, independent, supremely intelligent, and supremely powerful, and that created me along with everything else that exists--if anything else exists" (Ariew and Watkins 38). So, because the mind does not have the properties within itself to directly perceive matter, God must exist because only God has infinite independence, power, and knowledge with which to create two separate, distinct, and independent substances. "
Abstract In Meditation One of his "Meditations on First Philosophy", Rene Descartes introduces his "evil Demon" as a device in his logical proof for the coherence of his intellect and thereby the basis of his argument to extend his famous deduction of individual existence - "I think therefore I am" - beyond the boundaries of individual consciousness. However, the "evil Demon" scenario undermines Descartes' argument as the Meditations progress in that it represents a challenge to his argument for the existence of God and thereby for the assertion of the certainty of sensory apprehension in Meditation Six. Thus, it will be argued that although the device of the "evil Demon" functions effectively in the assertion of radical doubt, it also undermines Descartes' argument in the rest of his text.
An analysis and critique of the first argument Descartes presents to prove God's existence in the Third Meditation of his "Meditations on First Philosophy".
2,415 words (approx. 9.7 pages), 0 sources, 2002, $ 73.95
Abstract This paper critically analyzes Descartes attempt at proving God exists in the Third Meditation of his "Meditations on First Philosophy". After thoroughly explaining how the argument unfolds in the original text, the writer offers two lines of objections that undercut his proof which focus on his claim that he has a "clear and distinct" idea of God and the relationship Descartes claims exists between the objective reality of an idea and the formal reality of the thing represented by that idea. (It also clearly defines all of these terms.)
From the Paper "In the Third Meditation of his Meditations on First Philosophy, Rene Descartes presents his first proof of God's existence by characterizing the nature of ideas, examining the relationship between causes and effects, and defining the relationships between ideas and the things or concepts they represent. He then applies these results to the clear and distinct idea of God he claims to have. Descartes systematically defines each of these components to build the premises for his argument in such a way that the conclusion that God exists immediately and obviously follows. As such, if one is going to deny that Descartes has irrefutably proved God's existence, one must find fault in at least one of these premises. This will be the strategy that I will employ in this paper. After laying out the premises of Descartes' first proof of God's existence and the justification he employs for each one, I will argue that his argument ultimately fails because he does not sufficient justify two of the most important premises. First, I will argue that he does not - and perhaps cannot - sufficiently prove that he really has a "clear and distinct" idea of a perfect God. Second, I will argue that he does not properly justify his claim that there is a direct relationship between the objective reality of an idea and the formal reality of the thing that causes the idea."
Abstract This paper discusses the Cartesian mind-body dilemma by analyzing Descartes' "Meditations on First Philosophy". The paper explains that Cartesian dualism intended to moderate between the established religious paradigm of the time and the emerging natural sciences and by positing mind and body as complete substances which refer to nothing but themselves. The paper also looks at how Descartes' theory of mind preserves the religious conception of man as an immortal soul in possession of free will by placing such outside the realm of the physical sciences. The paper points out that Descartes' "Meditations on First Philosophy" seeks to establish two distinct classes of substances in mind and extension, but fails to adequately address the manner in which these two incommensurable substances interact to generate our experience of the world. The writer suggests that Descartes conceives of the body as a 'kingdom within a kingdom' of mind, and is left with the problem of how these kingdoms are able to carry out diplomatic relations with one another.
From the Paper "The cogito, 'I think therefore I am', delimits mind as the substance of thought, the primary existential of being. This is arrived at by proposing that there could be a malicious demon of some sort that may be propagating a vast illusion of experience, generating even our thoughts. Even in this radical scepticism, however, Descartes concludes that there must be something that this hoax is played upon, and no matter what this demon may be able to do, he can never convince something that it is nothing; "...I must finally conclude that this proposition, I am, I exist, is necessarily true whenever it is put forward by me or conceived in my mind" . The cogito, therefore, shows mind to be a substance that is necessarily true without reference to any other substance. It is the essence to which all the modes of thought refer."
Abstract This paper examines how in "Meditation II" Rene Descartes states that he is a "thinking thing" (Descartes 16-18). It analyzes what Descartes meant by this statement and how it has worked into Descartes other meditations on truth, reality and existence.
Abstract This paper is an examination of Descartes book, "Meditations on First Philosophy." The author examines the steps that Descartes took in order to prove his hypothesis that God is a deceiver. He examines three different proofs and shows how Descartes comes to these realizations only after a careful and logical thought process in which he tears down and rebuilds everything that he believes in.
From the Paper "Now he bases the rest of his proof off of these three observations. Because he has been convinced that something comes from something, the idea he has of God had to have been created by something, either himself or something else. He then states that he is finite and imperfect, and thus he cannot have an idea of the infinite and perfect on his own. He, being finite and imperfect, is not as powerful as the thought he has of an infinite and perfect God. Therefore, because he is not powerful enough to create this idea, it must have come from some other source."
Abstract This paper discusses how Descartes' Grand Project was a good idea because identifying and establishing philosophically certain beliefs was necessary in order to provide a solid foundation upon which to base sound philosophical theories. It further explains that Descartes understood that if the foundation was flawed, everything that rested upon it would be flawed, so he formulated his method of doubt in his Meditations on First Philosophy in order to establish a solid foundation he and other philosophers could rely upon. The paper then reports that in considering material provided in Meditations I through IV, it is evident that Descartes' purpose was to systematically question everything he had believed up to that point, logically test its veracity, and subsequently identify unquestionable truths.
Abstract The paper discusses "Meditations on First Philosophy" in which philosopher Rene Descartes uses proof of God's existence to both confirm and complete his views of nature, the external world, and the validation of reason. The paper shows that Descartes' arguments in the proof of God's existence also serve to validate his views of reason and human nature.
From the Paper "As such, Cartesian dualism forms the basis for Descartes proofs of the existence of God. Both the first and second proofs of the existence of God that are discussed in this essay are firmly based in the human mind's conception of God. In the proof in the Meditations III, Descartes argues that God must exist in order to place the idea of God in the finite minds of humans. In Meditations V, Descartes argues that human ideas of the internal qualities of God, including infinity and independence, could not have originated within the human mind, and thus God must exist to create these ideas."
Abstract This paper analyzes Rene Descartes' works, Meditations I, II and III, illustrating his arguments proving the existence of God. The paper outlines Descartes' use of a circular argument, using the existence of God as a basis for proving that his clear and distinct ideas result from the existence and nature of God as non-treacherous. The paper discusses Descartes' arguments, presenting their failure in proving God's existence.
From the Paper "In Meditations III, Rene Descartes attempts to prove in the existence of God. In essence, Descartes argues that God exists because his mind can conceive of God. There are numerous reasons that Descartes? proof for the existence of God fails. First, Descartes uses a circular argument, using the existence of God as a basis for proving that his clear and distinct ideas result from the existence and nature of God as non-treacherous. In addition, Descartes never considers that a truly benign and good God could conceivably mislead humans if there were some aspect of the world too horrific for them to know."
