Descartes Meditations Essay Example For Students

Descartes Meditations Essay Descartes Cogito Ergo Sum (I am, I exist) argument is a complex one. In many ways, he constructs a convincing argument for the existence of the self, and for the process of the thinking being, the essence of that self. In this meditation on his philosophy, Descartes on numerous attempts tries to convince both the readers, as well as himself, of his theory that we must reject all of our present ideas and beliefs and start from nothing. He believes that the only thing that has any certainty at this point is his own existence as a thinking being. Everything else, which he has learned throughout his entire life and believed in, is to be thrown out because it is not known clearly and distinctly. Descartes method and theory on knowledge was well planned and carefully thought out. It is evident that he spent a great deal of time determining the principles that he would use as determinants for judging whether a specific idea was justified and true. In my opinion, there are some flaws contained in Descartes argument. Among these flaws are Descartes apparent determination to prove his theory on his individual existence in the world and the existence of G-d to backup and prove himself and his theories. At the beginning of meditation two, Descartes is stuck in the middle of nothingness. He has nothing, nothing to believe in and everything around him he regards as false. This is because he cannot believe what he has learned and he is alsounable to trust his senses due to the fact that they deceive him. He feels like he is drowning in a whirlpool and cannot reach the top and get out nor can he put his feet on the bottom and stand. Everything in the world at this point he has called into doubt, including himself. Everything that he has ever seen, learned or thought is now external from what he deems to be true and he is beginning his knowledge from non-existence. Descartes although is certain of one thing, nothing (but to be certain of nothing is still to be certain of something?). Descartes is a rational thinker and he rationalizes through his studies that nothing in the world is known. He decided to re-start his belief process and call everything he has ever believed in, into doubt. He is debating complex ideas in his head, changing his mind and objectively making decisions, so his existence in a world has to be a certainty. The fact that he is having these thoughts, whether right or wrong proves mental capacity. Descartes then states with certainty Cogito ergo sum (I am, I exist). This is the first accurate idea that Descartes knows with any conviction, he knows that he is a thinking being. Descartes still does not know what he is, he says but what then am I? A thing that thinks. What is that? A thing that doubts, understands, affirms, denies, wills, refuses, and that also imagines and senses. He is aware of his mental capacity and knows he thinks, deliberates and makes decisions, but he still rejects his body and his senses. One major flaw found in Descartes argument is that while critically examining, and then rejecting, mostly everything in the world around him, he maintained that he could prove the existence of G-d, beyond a shadow of a doubt. For thousands of years,people have been trying to prove G-ds existence but he has yet to be successful. It seems to me that Descartes showed a display of arrogance in supposing that he could devise a method of proving the existence of G-d, doing so without a great deal of difficulty. At one point in his discourse on method, Descartes sets out a code of morals, which he plans to abide by. Descartes states that he plans to obey the laws and the customs of my country, constantly holding on to the religion in which, by G-ds grace, I had been instructed from my childhood . It is quite apparent from this passage, that Descartes had accepted and embraced the idea of G-d long before he even began to question it. With this pre-judgement of G-ds existence, he could not po ssibly have made a fair and accurate conclusion as to whether or not G-d really exists. The fact that he was so ready and willing to accept G-ds existence, while being so critical of everything else around him illustrates how careful he was to prove a G-d of power and benevolence. He then used his idea of G-d to explain and justify his existence and everything else he wants to prove as clearly and distinctly in his argument. If Descartes were to have rejected the ideas of G-d and religion, he would have had a much harder time proving his own existence and the existence of elements which he believed to be true. Had this not been the case, I see no way in which Descartes could have come to feel that he had been able to provide such a secure proof of G-d and his own existence. The Panopticon, an architectural project developed by Jeremy Bentham EssayTo evaluate the Cogito argument, we must first understand it clearly. Thereare four key statements in meditation two that lead Descartes to the certaintythat he exists. Herewith is a summation of Descartes argument:1) Am I so tied to the body and to the senses that I cannot exist without them?2) But certainly I should exist, if I were to persuade myself of something. 3)Then there is no doubt that I exist, if he (evil demon) deceives me. 4) I am,I exist or in other words I think, therefore I am. These claims respectively suggest, that by denying, persuading, and beingdeceived; a certain faculty of thought is being used. By thinking, one can becertain that he exists. Though the argument may seem simple and straightforward, upon closer inspectionthis is not the case.There seems to be some questions concerning the Cogitosinterpretation, the most important being: What is the first certainty thatDescartes uncovers?What perspective does he use to rationalize thiscertainty?, and how does he back it up? By examining the inferential,intuitional and epistemic interpretations, we can discover which interpretationof the Cogito was meant by Descartes in Meditation two. At first it seems obvious that Descartes had meant for the Cogito to be aninferential argument. Of the key propositions in the Meditations all seem tohave the commonality of thinking as their first premise. Similarly the secondpremise and the conclusion seem to follow the same pattern. The second premiseposits the notion: Whatever thinks exists; followed by the conclusion:therefore, I exist. To know something by inference, is to discover something based on previousknowledge.In Descartes case, he has come to know a metaphysical certainty,existence, based on a prior metaphysical certainty, thinking. The soundness ofthis reasoning is good because know matter what we do it is impossible to denythat we think. It seems simple enough, until we consider that Descartes seemsto emphasize that his first absolute certainty is existence. Using the criteriafor inference then, it is impossible that I exist is the first certainty. This is a weak argument for in order for this inference to work; Descartes wouldhave to make revisions to meditation two.However, since he feels so stronglyof this first certainty, I am not convinced that Descartes had meant for thisinterpretation. The intuitional interpretation of the Cogito, maintains that it ismetaphysically certain because Descartes has intuited it. Descartes idea ofintuition is likened to a flash of insight.It can be seen to be true, thesame way we know that that 2+3=5.He simply knows he exists based on a directunderstanding. With this interpretation, cleary the proposition I exist is thefirst certainty. The problem of this argument is that the idea of intuition istoo subjective an interpretation to prove that he exists. There is no way toreplicate this procedure and obtain the same conclusion as Descartes. Theevidence for this interpretation is not strong enough to render it to be theone Descartes intended. The evidence for the epistemic interpretation of the Cogito is good. I feelthat this is the most reasonable interpretation because it seems to be incharacter with the whole of the meditations. Descartes reasoning behind hismetaphysical certainty is that he simply has no reason to doubt it. Previous tothe second meditation, Descartes had used doubt as his tool; in doing so he feltit necessary to suspend all judgment. Here he is able to scrutinize all themajor arguments of meditation two and come to the conclusion that he has noreason to doubt that I exist. It could be conceded that Descartes did notexplore enough sources of doubt. This objection seems inconsequentialconsidering the scope of the problems from the other interpretations. Having established his existence, Descartes finds that his essence is the mind. He places a major importance on the intellect. In further meditations it is themind, through understanding, that leads us to various conclusions. Near theend of Meditation two, Descartes demonstrates how the ideas of the mind are moreattune to finding knowledge than are senses are. The point that he makes here isthat only through the mind can we understand the essential qualities of the wax. Melted a piece of wax exhibits qualities such as extension and mutability. These are concepts that are only clear to the intellect. The main point thatDescartes was trying to get across by using this wax experiment is, that if hecan understand the wax better with his mind, then it certainly follows that heshould know himself better through the same faculty. The Meditations has given me a better understanding of philosophical issues. Ihave learned to suspend judgment so that I may use my intellect to understandthings. Descartes presentation of the mind body problem has given me a newtopic to explore. Is it the mind that rules the body or the body that rules themind. Where does one begin, and the other end? By using some of Descartesmethods I have attempted to see his arguments, and tried to come to my ownconclusions. The mere fact that Descartes found so many certainties in theMeditations is surprising. It is not always easy to find a hypothesis thatstands up to doubt. The Meditations have taught me to be open minded, and toacknowledge that sometimes we make mistakes. However, if we take caution anduse reason carefully we are capable of finding certainty.