Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Rene descartes mind and body
Rene descartes mind and body
Essay on descartes third meditation
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Rene descartes mind and body
Descartes’ Special Causal Principle
In his Meditations, Rene Descartes attempts to uncover certain truths about existence. In his Third Meditation, he establishes his "special causal principle" (SCP). Descartes uses this principle to explore the origin of ideas, and to prove the existence of God. I agree that there is much logic to be found in the SCP, but I disagree with Descartes method of proving God's existence, and in this essay I will explain why. I will begin by explaining the SCP, and will then demonstrate how Descartes applies this principle to prove that God exists. I will then present my critique of the SCP, and expose the flaws in both of Descartes proofs with regards to the principle. A conclusion will then follow.
In Descartes Second Meditation, he established that because he is a thinking being, he exists. In the Third Meditation, Descartes attempts to build upon this foundation by questioning whether or not anything exists outside of him. In order to do so, he must distinguish between those of his thoughts that come from outside, and those which only seem to. The method Descartes uses for this differentiation is the special causal principle (SCP). At its core, the SCP is a basic cause and effect argument. Descartes begins his rationale for the SCP as follows:
Now it is manifest by the natural light that there must be at least as much reality in the efficient and total cause as in the effect of that cause.1
There are two major outcomes of this logic. Firstly, that something cannot come from nothing, and secondly that what contains more reality (or is more perfect) cannot come from something that contains less reality (or is less perfect). To illustrate this argu...
... middle of paper ...
...clusion, there is undeniable logic in the SCP. Once the SCP is explained to be founded on the ability to recognize self-evident truths, it becomes a reliable principle through which to explore the existence of God. But the SCP becomes unclear and less distinct when dealing with metaphysical objects such as ideas. By extending the SCP to ideas, Descartes ventures too far away from his notions of "clarity" and "distinctness." Had Descartes chosen not to limit himself to his own thoughts as the sole vehicles for exploring whether or not God exists, he would likely have met with much more success.
BIBLIOGRAPHY:
Cottingham, John [ed]. Meditations on First Philosophy. Cambridge University Press. Great Britain; 1997
Notes
1 Paragraph 41
2 Ibid.
3 Ibid.
4 Paragraph 43
5 Paragraph 45
6 Paragraph 42
7 Paragraph 51
In constructing his argument for God's existence, Descartes analyzes several aspects of the nature of human thought. He begins by outlining the various types of thoughts we have, which include ideas, thoughts, volitions and judgments. Ideas, or images of ideas can only exist within the mind and are certain of existence. Volitions, or choices are firmly within the mind and are also certain. Emotions, such as love, fear, hate, all exist in the mind and are certain as well. Judgments involve reference to effects outside the mind and are subject to doubt. Therefore, judgments are not certain and distinct. Descartes believes that images, volitions, and emotions are never false but it is our judg...
In his book Meditations on First Philosophy, Descartes tries to accomplish several subject concerns. Firstly, Descartes attempts to accomplish the use of methodological doubt to rid himself of all beliefs that could be false. Then, he arrives at particular beliefs that could not possibly be false. Next, he discovers a criterion of knowledge. Also, he proves that the mind is distinct from the body and also the existence of God.
In earlier meditations Descartes proved that he existed through the Cogito argument. Descartes must now move on to examine and explore questions about the world around him, but instead of doing this he first stop to examine the question of whether or not God exists. Descartes wants to know that he was created by an all knowing, perfect creator that is good and wants to make sure that he was not created by an evil spirit or demon. If Descartes can prove that he was created by a perfect all knowing creator then his ideas must carry some semblance of truth, because God is not a deceiver and he must of placed these ideas in Descartes. Descartes has good reasons for searching for the answer to the question of God’s existence, now he has to come up with a good sound argument to prove it.
In this paper, I will explain how Descartes uses the existence of himself to prove the existence of God. The “idea of God is in my mind” is based on “I think, therefore I am”, so there is a question arises: “do I derive my existence? Why, from myself, or from my parents, or from whatever other things there are that are less perfect than God. For nothing more perfect than God, or even as perfect as God, can be thought or imagined.” (Descartes 32, 48) Descartes investigates his reasons to show that he, his parents and other causes cannot cause the existence of himself.
...ircle may have had a solid foundation and belief. However, I just gave you, with supporting evidence, my view of why the Cartesian circle is wrong and why I believe that Descartes was trying to make the point that God must exist in order for him or us to even have the clear and distinct perception to dwell on the idea of God, an idea that only God himself created. I hope this solves the issue of the Cartesian circle and hopefully strengthens Descartes argument of how the circle is false and he was maybe just misunderstood. My claim will stand that the Cartesian circle was just a big misunderstanding, and Descartes, by no means, interacted with the belief and structure of this falsified circle.
One of Rene Descartes’ major culminations in Meditations on First Philosophy is “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” (Descartes:17). This statement can be explicated by examining Descartes’ Cartesian method of doubt and his subsequent discovery of basic truths. Even though I do believe that Descartes concludes with a statement that is accurate: cogito ergo sum, there are areas of his proof that are susceptible to defamation. These objections discover serious error with Descartes’ method used in determining the aforementioned conclusion.
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.
Ideas, innovations, and inventions are all created from brilliant minds. Than how did these ideas come to be? Descartes believes that God is the cause of new innovations adding, therefore God instilled in us the idea of his existence. Explaining, in order for us to draw an idea from a presumption or thought, than an object must have been derived not by us but rather God. An example of his presumption of the existence of God would be the fact that if one cannot imagine a bookshelf without books. Whether one exists or not, it is true than that they cannot be separated from each other. Descartes follows by stating that “he cannot conceive God without existence, existence is inseparable from him.”
Rene Descartes was a philosopher credited as the “Father of Modern Philosophy.” He was given this title because of his impeccable ideas he continuously came up with. He is well-known for his many famous pieces such including his very own Descartes Mediations 1 and 2. In these pieces he discusses how he came about his ideas of “I think, therefore I am.” His way of thinking is incredible and far from a normal humans perspective.
Descartes affirms that he is certain that he is a thinking thing. His reasoning, however, seems to be a circular argument. Descartes knows he is a thinking thing because “in this first instance of knowledge, there is nothing but a certain clear and distinct perception of what I affirm” (Descartes, 24). He concludes, “everything I very clearly and distinctly perceive is true” (Descartes, 24). Descartes could only know that what he clearly and distinctly perceives is true if he can be certain he is a thinking thing. Throughout this proof, Descartes is trying to use God’s existence as a way of affirming that which he clearly and distinctly perceives. However, he is also trying to prove God’s existence by claiming that the idea of God is a clear and distinct perception. Without inquiring into the existence of God, “it appears I am never capable of being completely ...
Rene Descartes decision to shatter the molds of traditional thinking is still talked about today. He is regarded as an influential abstract thinker; and some of his main ideas are still talked about by philosophers all over the world. While he wrote the "Meditations", he secluded himself from the outside world for a length of time, basically tore up his conventional thinking; and tried to come to some conclusion as to what was actually true and existing. In order to show that the sciences rest on firm foundations and that these foundations lay in the mind and not the senses, Descartes must begin by bringing into doubt all the beliefs that come to him by the senses. This is done in the first of six different steps that he named "Meditations" because of the state of mind he was in while he was contemplating all these different ideas. His six meditations are "One:Concerning those things that can be called into doubt", "Two:Concerning the Nature of the Human mind: that it is better known than the Body", "Three: Concerning God, that he exists", "Four: Concerning the True and the False", "Five: Concerning the Essence of Material things, and again concerning God, that he exists" and finally "Six: Concerning the Existence of Material things, and the real distinction between Mind and Body". Although all of these meditations are relevant and necessary to understand the complete work as a whole, the focus of this paper will be the first meditation.
Descartes thinks that we have a very clear and distinct idea of God. He thinks God must exist and Descartes himself must exist. It is a very different way of thinking shown from the six meditations. Descartes uses ideas, experiments, and “proofs” to try and prove God’s existence.
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.
This paper's purpose is to prove the existence of God. There are ten main reasons that are presented in this paper that show the actuality of God. It also shows counter-arguments to the competing positions (the presence of evil). It also gives anticipatory responses to possible objections to the thesis.
In this essay I discuss why there is proof that there is a supernatural being known as God, who has created everything we know and experience.