Analysis Of Rene Descartes First Meditation

1671 Words4 Pages

The question that has plagued philosophers for centuries has been “how do we come to know what we know?” The renowned philosopher Rene Descartes discusses this phenomenon, lending forth his own solutions to this perennial predicament. In the First Meditation, Descartes’ examines truth and fallacy through the methodical picking-apart of candidates of truth. Descartes’ idea of knowledge revolves around the philosophical staple, “I think therefore I am” and believing we should come upon truth and knowledge by questioning what is presently known, looking towards God as a viable solution, and ultimately coming to conclusions by relying on the mind and intellectual thought. In the following essay, I will defend Descartes’ beliefs and illustrate how his ideas are more rational and beneficial when compared to the ideas of other philosophers and religious nonbelievers. …show more content…

Here he introduces his Method of Doubt, a systematic process of doubting deniable truths in order to uncover the true knowledge of things. The metaphor of a bulldozer can be used to understand this concept, substituting doubt as the bulldozer. If the bulldozer digs at the ground and finds the ground soft, the foundation of truth is weak. However, when the ground is solid and resists the bulldozer, the truth is proven. Simply, the Cartesian notion of universal doubt is to apply doubt to all candidates of knowledge and truth. Its purpose is to always search for deeper truths, inspiring intellectual beings to pursue their utmost potential. For instance, if a person is worried about one rotten apple spreading the rot to the rest of the basket of apples, would that person pick that one apple out, or would they dump out the whole basket and individually inspect each

Open Document