Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Rene descartes first meditation analysis
Meditations on first philosophy descartes
Criticism of descartes second meditation
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Rene descartes first meditation analysis
In Alan Gewirth’s The Cartesian Circle Reconsidered, he expands on an argument he made in a previous paper in regards to a possible logical fallacy in Descartes Meditations on First Philosophy. This fallacy is called the Cartesian Circle in reference to Descartes apparently circular reasoning that he can have clear and distinct ideas because of God’s existence, but that the proof of God’s existence and is itself based on clear and distinct ideas. Gewirth’s response to critics of Descartes is that Descartes use different types of certainty to prove the existence and veracity of God compared to accuracy of clear and distinct ideas. The latter of these types of certainty, metaphysical certainty, is what he focuses on in The Cartesian Circle Reconsidered. Gewirth details three interpretations of why simple propositions are susceptible to metaphysical doubt: operational, conceptual, and ontological. His argument is that Descartes only means ontological doubt in the Meditations. However, while his arguments for this and against the conceptual interpretation are strong, his claim that the operational interpretation is weak is not as reasonable.
The operational interpretation claims that the potential doubt of simple propositions stems partly from a deception in the operation of memory on previous intuitions rather solely the intuitions themselves. Descartes himself says something to this effect this in meditation three,
“When I consider the nature of the triangle, it appears very clearly to me… that its three angles equal two right angles, and I cannot help believing this to be true as long as I attend to the proof; but as soon as I turn my mental gaze elsewhere, even though I may remember that I perceived it clearly, I can easily dou...
... middle of paper ...
...legitimate.
While Gewirth makes clear arguments for and against other interpretations, his argument against the operational interpretation is neither clear nor supported as strongly in the text as the others. Descartes specifically describes doubt of both intuitions and the memories of them that follow, and these are not necessarily as mutually exclusive as Gewirth would have his reader believe.
Works Cited
DESCARTES, René. "Descartes' Meditations and Associated Texts." Modern Philosophy: An Anthology of Primary Sources. Second ed. Indianapolis: Hackett, 2009. 35-68. Kindle AZW File.
GEWIRTH, Alan. “The Cartesian Circle Reconsidered.” The Journal of Philosophy 67:19 (1970): 668-685. Philosopher’s Index, EBSCOhost (accessed January 27, 2014). http://flagship.luc.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=phl&AN=PHL1030595&site=ehost-live
Descartes, Rene. Meditations on First Philosophy. Translated by John Cottingham. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge. 1996.
Through Descartes’s Meditations, he sought to reconstruct his life and the beliefs he had. He wanted to end up with beliefs that were completely justified and conclusively proven. In order to obtain his goal, Descartes had to doubt all of his foundational beliefs so that he could start over. This left Descartes doubting the reality of the world around him and even his own existence. In order to build up to new conclusively proven and justified true beliefs, Descartes needed a fixed and undeniable starting point. This starting point was his cogito, “I think, therefore I am.” In this paper I will argue that Descartes’s argument that he is definite of his own existence, is unsound.
Many readers follow Descartes with fascination and pleasure as he descends into the pit of skepticism in the first two Meditations, defeats the skeptics by finding the a version of the cogito, his nature, and that of bodies, only to find them selves baffled and repulsed when they come to his proof for the existence of God in Meditation III. In large measure this change of attitude results from a number of factors. One is that the proof is complicated in ways which the earlier discourse is not. Second is that the complications include the use of scholastic machinery for which the reader is generally quite unprepared -- including such doctrines as a Cartesian version of the Great Chain of Being, the Heirloom theory of causaltiy, and confusi ng terms such as "eminent," "objective" and "formal reality" used in technical ways which require explanation. Third, we live in an age which is largely skeptical of the whole enterprise of giving proofs for the existence of God. A puzzled student once remaked, "If it were possible to prove that God exists, what would one need faith for?" So, even those inclined to grant the truth of the conclusion of Descartes' proof are often skeptical about the process of reaching it.
Descartes, René. "Meditation Three." Descartes, René. Meditations on First Philosophy. Trans. Donald A. Cress. Third Edition. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company, Inc., 1993. 24-35. Paperback.
The meditator’s endeavor in Rene Descartes’ meditations on first philosophy is introduced through a biographical account, with which any reader can relate. Realizing how in the past he had “accepted many false claims as true” and “how everything [he] had later constructed on top of those falsehoods was doubtful”, he feels the need to “tear everything down completely and begin from the most basic foundations”. His objective is to establish a body of knowledge which is absolutely certain.
Descartes, R., & Cottingham, J. (1986). Meditation on First Philosophy: With Selections from the Objections and Replies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
In the first meditation, Descartes makes a conscious decision to search for “in each of them [his opinions] at least some reason for doubt”(12). Descartes rejects anything and everything that can be doubted and quests for something that is undeniably certain. The foundation of his doubt is that his opinions are largely established by his senses, yet “from time to time I [Descartes] have found that the senses deceive, and it is prudent never to trust completely those who have deceived us even once”(12). First, Descartes establishes that error is possible, employing the example of the straight stick that appears bent when partially submerged in water, as mentioned in the Sixth Replies (64-65). Secondly, he proves that at any given time he could be deceived, such is the case with realistic dreams. Further, Descartes is able to doubt absolutely everything since it cannot be ruled out that “some malicious demon … has employed all his energies in order to deceive me” (15). The malicious demon not only causes Descartes to doubt God, but also sends him “unexpectedly into a deep whirlpool which tumbles me around so that I can neither stand on the bottom or swim on the top”(16). Descartes has reached the point where he must begin to rebuild by searching for certainty.
Moving up the tower of certainty, he focuses on those ideas that can be supported by his original foundation. In such a way, Descartes’s goal is to establish all human knowledge on firm foundations. Thus, Descartes gains this knowledge from the natural light by using it to reference his main claims, specifically the existence of God in Meditation III, and provide an explanation to his radical thoughts. In Meditation III “The existence of God,” Descartes builds his foundation of certainty in the natural light through the examination of God’s existence.
Descartes, Rene. Discourse on Method and Meditations on First Philosophy. Trans. Donald A. Cress. 4th ed. N.p.: Hackett, 1998. Print.
[1] Descartes, Rene. Meditations on First Philosophy. 1641 [Translated by John Veitch (1901)] Meditation 6, http://www.classicallibrary.org/descartes/meditations/9.htm
Descartes’ first two Meditations are arguably the most widely known philosophical works. Because of this, one can make the error of assuming that Descartes’ method of doubt is self-evident and that its philosophical implications are relatively minor. However, to assume this would be a grave mistake. In this paper, I hope to spread light on exactly what Descartes’ method of doubt is, and how, though it furnishes challenges for the acceptance of the reality of the external world, it nonetheless does not lead to external world skepticism.
Descartes, Rene. The Philosophical Writings, tr. John Cottingham and Dugald Murdoch. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985.
Descartes, R. & Donald A. C. (1993). Discourse On Method; And, Meditations On First Philosophy / René Descartes; Translated By Donald A. Cress. Indianapolis: Hackett Pub. Co.
The teaching of Descartes has influenced many minds since his writings. Descartes' belief that clear and distinct perceptions come from the intellect and not the senses was critical to his ultimate goal in Meditations on First Philosophy, for now he has successfully created a foundation of true and certain facts on which to base a sold, scientific belief structure. He has proven himself to exist in some form, to think and therefore feel, and explains how he knows objects or concepts to be real.
Steven, S. (2011). Cartesian Dualism: An Evaluation of Wireduan and Gilbert Ryle’s Refutations. Kritike, 5(2), 156-165.