Aristotle Vs Descartes Research Paper

680 Words2 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Aristotle vs Descartes

Epistemology Lisa Araujo
Western Connecticut State University Just as most philosophers, Aristotle and Descartes have some similarities and many differences on their ideas about the definition of knowledge and truth. Aristotle’s Posterior Analytics discusses the origin of knowledge and how it relates to something real such as demonstration, memories, perception. In Descartes’ Meditations it seems as though he uses doubt to define knowledge, he uses God and matter to explore his ideas. Aristotle and Descartes are similar because they both use inductive reasoning in their theories. They are very different because Aristotle’s main idea relates to principles that he believes lead to understanding and knowledge, on the other hand …show more content…

Aristotle believes that knowledge has to be connected to something real and discusses universals. On the contrary Descartes focuses on his ‘I think therefore I am’ statement. Those theories are different because I think that Aristotle’s idea stems from other events while Descartes’ statements originate from personal existence. Aristotle mentions how perception is present in animals, and how perception leads to memories and experiences which all play a part in knowledge. “And from experience, or from the whole universal that has come to rest in the soul (the one part from the many, whatever is one and the same in all those things), there comes a principle of skill and of understanding of skill if it deals with what is the case” (Stanley, 2003, p.426). I think that Aristotle believes that perception, memory, skill, and understanding, are all the parts of the whole that makeup knowledge. In contrast, Descartes connects his theory to his only certainty which is existence, and from there he questions if a higher power may be controlling his thoughts. Descartes even doubts his existence in a sense, “But what am I, now that I suppose that there is a certain genius which is extremely powerful, and, if I may say so, malicious, who employs all his powers in deceiving me?” (Stanley, 2003, p.431). Both Aristotle and Descartes have uncertainty in their beliefs about the definition of knowledge. And

Show More
Related

  • Comparing Knowledge in Descartes’ Meditations on First Philosophy and Hume’s An Enquiry Concerning

    860 Words  | 2 Pages

    Comparing Knowledge in Descartes’ Meditations on First Philosophy and Hume’s An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding,

    Read More

  • An Examination of the Second Meditation of Descartes

    1585 Words  | 4 Pages

    Baird and Kaufmann, the editors of our text, explain in their outline of Descartes' epistemology that the method by which the thinker carried out his philosophical work involved first discovering and being sure of a certainty, and then, from that certainty, reasoning what else it meant one could be sure of. He would admit nothing without being absolutely satisfied on his own (i.e., without being told so by others) that it was incontrovertible truth. This system was unique, according to the editors, in part because Descartes was not afraid to face doubt. Despite the fact that it was precisely doubt of which he was endeavoring to rid himself, he nonetheless allowed it the full reign it deserved and demanded over his intellectual labors. "Although uncertainty and doubt were the enemies," say Baird and Kaufmann (p.16), "Descartes hit upon the idea of using doubt as a tool or as a weapon. . . . He would use doubt as an acid to pour over every 'truth' to see if there was anything that could not be dissolved . . . ." This test, they explain, resulted for Descartes in the conclusion that, if he doubted everything in the world there was to doubt, it was still then certain that he was doubting; further, that in order to doubt, he had to exist. His own existence, therefore, was the first truth he could admit to with certainty, and it became the basis for the remainder of his epistemology.

    Read More

  • Descartes Meditation 1 Analysis

    958 Words  | 2 Pages

    In his work, Meditations on First Philosophy, Descartes narrates the search for certainty in order to recreate all knowledge. He begins with “radical doubt.” He asks a simple question “Is there any one thing of which we can be absolutely certain?” that provides the main question of his analysis. Proceeding forward, he states that the ground of his foundation is the self – evident knowledge of the “thinking thing,” which he himself is. 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 of human knowledge of firm foundations. Thus, Descartes gains this knowledge from the natural light by using it to reference his main claims, specifically

    Read More

  • Philosophy Of Descartes

    1455 Words  | 3 Pages

    In the New Merriam Webster Dictionary, sophism is defined as a plausible but fallacious argument. In Rene Descartes Meditation V, he distinguishes the existence of God, believing he must prove that god exists before he can examine any corporeal objects outside of himself. By proving that the existence of God is not a sophism, he also argues that God is therefore the Supreme Being and the omnipotent one. His conclusion that God does exist enables him to prove the existence of material things, and the difference between the soul and the body.

    Read More

  • Analysis Of Descartes Discourse On Method

    1251 Words  | 3 Pages

    Descartes asserts knowledge is done through experimentation using a scientifc method to removing opinions, and come up with a solution to conflicts. In the Discourse on Method, Descartes describes his unique style of reasoning, and makes clear that his main goal for writing is to solve epistemology, or the theory of knowledge. Similar to Socrates, Descartes sensory perceptions cause a false belief in the world around us, he believes one needs to be thinking on the intelligible level, however Descartes provides a different method to achieving this goal.

    Read More

  • Plato's The Allegory Of The Cave And Cogito Ergo Sum

    871 Words  | 2 Pages

    Plato and Descartes have similarities and differences in their views about the intellectual ascent and the ability to achieve certain knowledge and the extent of rationality. Both authors agree that in order to attain certainty, we must look beyond the surface and have a deeper understanding, but Descartes argues that, even then, only a few things can be certain. Also, Plato and Descartes both acknowledge that a higher power is the source of reasoning. However, Descartes believes that God is the perfect being and that we should depend on him for truth and reason whereas goodness is the basis of reasoning for Plato. If we follow Plato and Descartes’ philosophies, then we can bypass solely relying on our senses and be fulfilled intellectuals.

    Read More

  • montaigne and descartes on doubting

    1564 Words  | 4 Pages

    Not only did Descartes set aside all of his previous knowledge, but he also set aside all knowledge he had gained, and that he continued to gain from his five senses. He would not believe what his eyes saw, or what his hand felt, because he could not yet determine his senses as giving him knowledge that could be turned into certainties. He did not have any reason to believe that he could rely on his senses. Descartes doubting of his senses also caused him to reject any knowledge that he had gained through life experience. Most of the knowl...

    Read More

  • Weaknesses of Descartes' Arguments

    1636 Words  | 4 Pages

    Descartes was incorrect and made mistakes in his philosophical analysis concerning understanding the Soul and the foundation of knowledge.  Yes, he coined the famous phrase, “I think therefore I am,” but the rest of his philosophical conclusions fail to be as solid (Meditation 4; 32). Descartes knew that if he has a mind and is thinking thoughts then he must be something that has the ability to think. While he did prove that he is a thinking thing that thinks (Meditation 3; 28), he was unable to formulate correct and true philosophical arguments and claims.  For instance, his argument for faith that a non-deceiving God exists and allows us to clearly reason and perceive was a circular argument.  Another issue with Descartes' philosophy is that he wanted to reconcile scientific and religious views, which is wrong since the two maintain completely different foundational beliefs and they should exist exclusively- without relation to the other.  Thirdly, he believed that the mind was the Self and the Soul, failing to recognize that humans have bodies and the outside world exists, and through which we gain our knowledgeable. Lastly, Descartes argues that ideas are all innate while they actually are not- we gain knowledge through experience.

    Read More

  • Descartes' Wax Passage

    1085 Words  | 3 Pages

    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.

    Read More

  • Compare And Contrast Descartes And Aristotle

    1509 Words  | 4 Pages

    For Descartes, these are mind and body, and for Plato they are body and soul. Aristotle, in contrast, believes in a singular being where both body and soul are connected. For myself, a Christian who believes in the existence of a life after death, Aristotle 's theory creates an obvious negation. While I could agree with the levels of the soul argument, I cannot agree with the body and soul being one and the same for the simple reason that I do not believe that when the body dies, everything dies. I believe something is left over. What that something is, where it goes and what its purpose is, I may not know for certain, but to believe otherwise would not create a better life for me. Believing the soul lives on beyond the body creates an inner desire to seek morality and goodness, and it is in that endeavor that one creates a “better” life. Similarly, it is intuition that leads me to reject Descartes ' argument because my best judgment would tell me not to believe that everything I know, all that I sense, is a figment of my mind. I cannot know if such a thing is true or false, but far too many questions are raised by such an explanation. For myself, neither Aristotle nor Descartes provide an adequate understanding into the nature of the

    Read More

  • Aristotle

    1768 Words  | 4 Pages

    In The Metaphysics, Aristotle states, “All men by nature desire to know.” Although, this is a generalization, of this insightful statement about the nature of humans and human understanding this statement truly captures what Aristotle was trying to figure out about humans and their thinking. Everyone has a desire to know or to understand. As rational beings we tend to contemplate very simple ideas to the most complicated, like our existence, or parts of the universe, or the universe as a whole. Aristotle is known as the father of modern day psychology and biology, even though many of his ideas of these two sciences was proven incorrect. The most important concepts of Aristotle’s theory of human understanding are the notion of cause, the infinite, and the soul.

    Read More

  • Rene Descartes and the Source of Knowledge

    2129 Words  | 5 Pages

    ...ll true knowledge is solely knowledge of the self, its existence, and relation to reality. René Descartes' approach to the theory of knowledge plays a prominent role in shaping the agenda of early modern philosophy. It continues to affect (some would say "infect") the way problems in epistemology are conceived today. Students of philosophy (in his own day, and in the history since) have found the distinctive features of his epistemology to be at once attractive and troubling; features such as the emphasis on method, the role of epistemic foundations, the conception of the doubtful as contrasting with the warranted, the skeptical arguments of the First Meditation, and the cogito ergo sum--to mention just a few that we shall consider. Depending on context, Descartes thinks that different standards of warrant are appropriate. The context for which he is most famous, and on which the present treatment will focus, is that of investigating First Philosophy. The first-ness of First Philosophy is (as Descartes conceives it) one of epistemic priority, referring to the matters one must "first" confront if one is to succeed in acquiring systematic and expansive knowledge.

    Read More

  • Descartes Source Of Knowledge

    1717 Words  | 4 Pages

    What is the source of knowledge? What can we know? Questions like these dominated western philosophy during the 17th and 18th century. This philosophical period was known as the epistemological turn. The quest for the source of knowledge was not an easy one. This question had led to many disagreements about the nature of knowledge, and a philosophical war was waged which would last two centuries. It began with the 17th century with a french philosopher by the name of Rene Descartes. The answer to his epistemological quest was rationalism. For Descartes rationalism was the key to keeping our reality in check. Descartes had undergone a process of purging all that he thought he knew to find the sole source of knowledge . After much examination Descartes came to the realization that there were few things that could be considered pure knowledge. Since most of the things we know come from the senses, and the senses were falliable. He made a crucial discovery that would forever change the face of philosophy. The mind he regarded is the tool and the that could lead to a pure source of knowledge unbridled by the senses. He believed that we can only trust our minds that which we can intuit or “deduce” on our own. Descartes called these ideas of knowledge a priori. A priori are ideas that are innate, and that we can only arrive at through a special kind of reasoning known as deductive reasoning.Descartes famously declares the statement “cogito ergo sum “to answer the question of our existence. Because if the senses are decieving who is to say that this world we live in is a lie created by a wicked genius we call god.”Descartes believed that if he existed it was because his mind was engaged in the process of thinking. In other words only ...

    Read More

  • Aristotle's Contributions Of Aristotle

    1067 Words  | 3 Pages

    Aristotle made contributions to logic, physics, biology, medicine, and agriculture. He redesigned most, if not all, areas of knowledge he studied. Later in life he became the “Father of logic” and was the first to develop a formalized way of reasoning. Aristotle was a greek philosopher who founded formal logic, pioneered zoology, founded his own school, and classified the various branches of philosophy.

    Read More

  • Compare And Contrast Descartes And Locke

    1019 Words  | 3 Pages

    Descartes defines knowledge as doubt and uncertainty. He describes that our main source of knowledge is our sense perception.

    Read More

More about Aristotle Vs Descartes Research Paper

Open Document