РефератыИностранный языкDeDescartes 2 Essay Research Paper DESCARTES

Descartes 2 Essay Research Paper DESCARTES

Descartes 2 Essay, Research Paper


DESCARTES’ MEDITATIONS


FROM: Descartes, Philosophy of Rene Descartes: Meditations on First Philosophy, Monarch Notes, 1 Jan 1963.


Introduction.


The Meditations were written in Latin and first published in Paris in


1641. Descartes dedicated this book to the Dean and Faculty of Theology at the


University of Paris. He believed that the approbation of those theologians


would constitute a public testimony of approval and support of the truth in


the content of his work.


The Meditations are the most important of all of Descartes’ works. They


contain his full metaphysical and epistemological position. He considers the


problems of the sources and nature of knowledge; the validity of truth; the


nature and destiny of man; the existence of God, and the creation of the


universe. This work is detailed far more than the Discourse.


Synopsis.


In the first meditation Descartes explains the reasons for his


methodological doubts. The second meditation describes the nature of the human


mind. The third meditation presents Descartes’ chief argument for the


existence of God. The fourth meditation shows the nature of error and points


out the requirements for conforming truths. The fifth meditation illustrates


the essence of corporeal nature and presents another demonstration of the


existence of God. The sixth and final meditation differentiates the soul from


the body.


Preface.


In a preface to the reader, Descartes replies to some of the


philosophical criticisms of his earlier book, the Discourse. He continues in


the preface to describe his effort to meditate seriously upon the important


questions of God and the human soul. His readers are advised to detach their


minds from sense pursuits. When they are enabled to remove all prejudices from


their characters, it becomes possible to realize the maximum benefit of these


meditations.


Meditation I


Summary.


Descartes declares that it was vital for him to wait until he was a


mature man prior to undertaking the great task embodied in the purpose of this


book. Initially he felt that all of his earlier beliefs must be removed.


Attacking the underlying assumptions of his former beliefs, he asserts that


everything he knew in the past was based upon sense perception. The senses,


however, may be deceptive in that the minute objects are apprehended they may


appear differently from various points of view. It is highly probable that


other things which appear certain through sensation may in reality be the


products of illusions.


Yet there are some objects of sensations which must be accepted as true.


For instance, Descartes affirms that he is seated by the fire clothed in a


winter dressing gown. It would be insane to deny his knowledge of his own


body. We must admit certain characteristics of objects. For instance,


extension, figure, quantity, number, place, time, may be imputed to objects.


In addition, there are mathematical truths relative to objects. We know a


square has four sides and not five.


The sciences which are concerned with composite or complex objects, are


less reliable in the truth of their propositions than the sciences which are


concerned with simple and general objects like arithmetic and geometry. Yet,


Descartes asks, how can I be certain that the knowledge I possess is in


reality true? In order to build a valid structure of knowledge he affirms that


he will consider all external reality as illusion. Even the perfect God will


be questioned in this universal doubt. He will assume the possibility that God


is a malignant demon who deliberately attempts to deceive him. In effect,


Descartes intends to suspend all judgment.


Descartes concludes this meditation with the observation that it is


extremely arduous to accomplish this doubtful state of mind. There is a


tendency for the human mind to return to former beliefs as a secure means of


resolving its problems. In the event that man permits this regression, he may


find it impossible to ever dispel the intellectual darkness.


Comment:


The Cartesian doubt reflects a contempt for an erudition based upon the


literature of the past. Descartes is not concerned with the arguments from the


great authorities of the past. He bases knowledge upon individual


intelligence. While Descartes approaches philosophy from an a priori position


independent of sense experience, his position regarding the attitude of doubt


necessary for the mind to arrive at truth is the unique contribution which he


makes to science and modern philosophy.


This initial meditation summarizes the earlier position of Descartes


found in the Discourse. In this first meditation, the foundation of Descartes’


philosophy has been restated in the detailed explanation of the rationale


behind his universal doubt. The real beginning of this book is the second


meditation.


Meditation II


Summary.


Descartes declares that the acceptance of his universal doubt likens him


to a swimmer plunged suddenly into deep water. He is unable to touch bottom


and unable to see the surface. In this floundering fashion he must achieve


the security of one certain fixed position by which he will know from whence


to proceed. In ancient times, Archimedes thought that it would be possible


for him to move the entire earth if only he could establish one fixed


absolute point. The search for a certain point of departure is vital if one


is to arrive at truthful knowledge from a position of universal doubt.


Descartes asserts that he assumes at this stage that everything is


false. He assumes there is no memory, senses, body, or any reality. It is


therefore possible that he is being deceived by the illusion of reality.


However, if he is being deceived, it follows that he must exist as a deceived


person. In this state of existence I ask, what am I?


Descartes asserts that in the past he believed that he was a man and


that a man was a rational animal. At present he cannot accept this. It would


be necessary for him to prove what an animal was and then determine the nature


of rationality. This is too complicated a problem at this moment of universal


doubt. In similar fashion all the attributes of the body, including his face,


hands, and arms, his senses and feeling that he occupies space as a unique


body separate from all others, must be held in doubt. The only proposition


that he can make at this juncture is that he is a thinking thing. He knows


that he exists only when he is thinking.


I am conscious that I exist. I who know, says Descartes, that I exist


ask the question, “what am I?” Having established that he is a thinking


thing, he proceeds to the problem of what a thinking thing actually is. He


concludes that he is the same being who performs the intellectual activities


of doubting, understanding, affirming, denying, willing, refusing, imagining


and perceiving.


He then proceeds to the more difficult task of proving the existence of


a material body beyond his mental state. He asserts that the body appears more


certain to men because they are able to touch and see a particular body. Yet


when we consider a piece of wax fresh from the beehive, we assume that this


wax possesses the definite characteristics that its color, figure, and size


present to our senses. It seems to have the odor of flowers and is cool and


hard to the touch. But when we place this wax in the fire, all that seems


real to the senses regarding the nature of wax disappears. All that can be


asserted about it is that it is extended, movable, and flexible. The


perception of this wax is not an act of sight, touch or imagination. It is an


intuition of the human mind. All material objects are understood by the mind


alone.


It is very difficult to eliminate one’s reliance upon sense knowledge.


Yet we must accommodate ourselves to a reliance upon our minds. Descartes


marvels at the source of error in the mind which occurs from the use of


language. For instance, the same word “wax” is used to describe the same


substance before and after its subjection to the fire. The meaning of words


may create ambiguity and error in thought. In man’s effort to build


knowledge, he must introspectively look within his mind, erasing all sense


images.


Comment:


Descartes admits intuition as a source of knowledge. While deduction is


admitted as a reliable source of truth, this is considered more complex.


Deduction requires inference and relationships. Deduction, therefore, cannot


be the source by which Descartes asserts his first principle. Existence is


something that is intuited. That is, it is apprehended immediately by an


attentive intellect as true. There exists no possible doubt regarding its


truth. Since this assurance does not proceed from a sensation of external


reality, this rational knowledge is independent of sense experience.


Descartes makes a clear distinction between faith and reason. He cannot


assert his belief in reality on faith at all. Faith to Descartes pertains to


the will alone. It is not an intellectual matter. Faith is something that is


accepted upon trust because we choose to believe it.


Meditation III


Summary.


Descartes affirms that he is a thinking being who doubts and affirms,


denies and knows. He is certain that he thinks because his knowledge is both


clear and distinct. Although he knows himself, he must establish the


existence of God in order to proceed further into a clear and distinct


knowledge of reality. While no evidence exists to support the supposition


that God deceives his mind into believing in an extra-mental reality,


Descartes states that he must first demonstrate the existence of God prior


to making any inquiry into the possibility of deception.


Descartes proceeds in his demonstration of the existence of God by


analyzing the nature of thought. An idea may be an image, a form, or a


judgment. The image or the apprehended form is never false. The source of


error lies in our judgment. It is necessary to formulate a judgment that this


given idea conforms ith the object it represents. Here resides the most


common source of error in judgment.


Some ideas may be innate. Some ideas are adventitious in that they come


involuntarily into the mind from outside. Other ideas are factitious in that


they are manufactured by myself by combining innate and adventitious ideas.


My innate ideas are guaranteed by nature – a spontaneous force that compels


my assent to the resemblance between my idea and the object my idea


represents. In the act by which I believe my idea of the object represents


the reality of the object, I am motivated by a blind impulse as the source of


my belief. Therefore, I cannot prove rationally that objects exist outside my


mind on this basis.


Descartes asks that our ideas be viewed as modes of consciousness. The


idea is purely subjective in that it resides only in the mind. If we consider


those ideas that are images, we observe a variety of ideas all varying in


perfection. Since the idea is an effect, the cause of this effect must possess


as much reality as the effect. It may be asserted that any cause must have as


much perfection as its effect. For instance, a stone cannot exist unless it


is produced by a cause at least as perfect as the stone. The idea of heat


must be produced in my mind by a cause with as much perfection as the heat.


When this principle is applied to his idea of God, Descartes asserts that the


cause, God, must have as much reality and perfection as his idea of God which


is in the effect. It is of the nature of perfection that a thing is perfect


only if it exists. Therefore, a perfect God must exist.


Descartes knows that he is not the cause of his own idea of God. He


thinks that any idea of an infinite, perfect, all-knowing God transcends his


own mental ability. God, therefore, causes the idea of God in his mind.


Because God is the cause, and the cause possesses as much perfection and


reality as the effect (the idea of God), and an object is perfect only if it


includes the concept of existence, Descartes asserts that the perfect cause,


God, truly exists.


Descartes demonstrates additionally that God exists by reason of the fact


that he himself exists as a thinking being having a concept of God. He asserts


that if he existed as an independent being possessing every perfection, he


would be God. Obviously his lack of perfection precludes the possibility of


this. However, what exactly is the cause of his existence? As a dependent


being, he asks upon whom he depends. If it is stated that he is dependent upon


some other less perfect being than God, then the question will arise as to the


source of this being’s dependence. Eventually it is necessary to state that an


all-perfect necessary being, possessing all the attributes of God, exists as


the cause of Descartes’ own contingent existence.


Since Descartes believes he has established that God caused the idea of


God in his mind, he next inquires into the problem of how he received this


idea from God. Descartes concludes that this idea is innate in him. At the


moment of his creation, God imposed the idea of himself in the mind of


Descartes very much like a worker stamping his name to the product of his


making. Descartes apprehends this idea in the same intuitive way that he


understands the fact of his own thinking existence. He does not deduce God’s


existence. He knows this immediately and intuitively.


Descartes concludes that the contemplation of the idea of God is the


source of greatest happiness in life. Although he admits that this is


incomparably less perfect than the contemplation of God in the life to come as


faith suggests, it is a fact of experience that the contemplation of God


provides great happiness.


Comment:


It is important to note that Descartes proceeds from the idea of the


infinite to the idea of the finite. This idea of God is the source of his


belief in the reality of objects that are extra-mental. The innate truth of an


infinite and perfect God is considered to be in the highest degree true.


However, Descartes does not assert that he knows God in the same manner in


which he knows his own selfhood. Because God is infinite, He is


incomprehensible to the finite mind. Descartes declares his pleasure in


contemplating this idea of the infinite God but does not suggest that he knows


the infinity of perfections that exist formally in God. There is a real


distinction or a real dualism that exists between the finite and the infinite


consciousness. Man is not identical with God. He is separate from God by


reason of his limitation and finite nature.


Meditation IV


Summary.


Descartes asserts that his idea of God and the infinite is more clear and


distinct than any idea of finite reality. This idea of God provides a path for


the discovery of the treasures of science and wisdom which reside perfectly in


God. His belief in extra-mental reality cannot be due to any deceptive action


of God. God is a perfect being and deception is imperfect by its nature. Any


mental errors that exist in his mind find their sources in his imperfect


nature. Errors do not proceed from God from the fact that any error is lacking


in reality. It is a defect or privation of knowledge.


It is conceivable that God might have created him as a being incapable of


being deceived. However, any inquiry into this area must presume some


understanding and judgment of the actions of God. God is infinite and


incomprehensible in His nature. The final cause or the purpose for the


creation of things as they are transcends the limited and finite understanding


of man. Descartes asserts that his mind is totally incapable of understanding


God’s actions. Therefore, it is pointless to ask why he has been created in


such a way that he is capable of falling into error. However, each individual


creature must be viewed not as

an individual but as a part of the universe as


a whole. Somehow, the imperfections of the individual contribute to the


creation of the perfect universe.


Regarding the source of error, Descartes declares that he discerns that


he possesses a faculty of cognition and one of election or free choice. There


is no possibility of error in the understanding or cognition by itself. The


understanding merely apprehends the idea. When error enters into the


situation, it does this through the action of the will. However, it is not the


power of willing, but the failure of the individual to restrain his will that


creates errors. The will must be restrained or limited to choosing only those


objects which are fully understood by the intellect. Clear and distinct ideas


are necessarily true. These ideas move the will to action when the ideas


reside in the intellect. Descartes asserts that the great clarity of the


concept of his own existence residing in the intellect moved his will to


accept this truth.


Whenever any idea is lacking clarity or distinction it is necessary to


restrain the will from judging the idea as either true or idea until such time


that the idea may become clear and distinct false. The individual must assert


a state of doubt regarding the Descartes concludes that the action by which he


abstains from judgment of an unclear idea is correct. Failure on his part to


limit his will opens the door to possible error.


Descartes concludes this meditation by asserting that any errors that he


accepted in the past were the result of his own imperfections and limitations.


He cannot complain or blame anyone else for those errors which were the result


of his own choosing. He possessed always the power to restrain his will. He


had the advantage of obtaining clear and distinct knowledge. This knowledge


would incline his will to choose the right act or object. In addition, he


possessed the resolution to suspend all judgment whenever a truth was not


clearly known to him.


Meditation V


This meditation examines the nature of matter. Descartes analyzes his


idea of matter and reasserts his ontological proof for the existence of God.


Descartes declares that he will abandon the important questions regarding


the nature of God and the nature of the human mind for the moment. In this


meditation he undertakes the question of the certainty of his knowledge of


material objects.


He proceeds by examining his conscious ideas regarding corporeal nature


in order to ascertain which of these ideas are clear and distinct. Because


clear and distinct ideas proceed from God, they may be accepted upon all


occasions as truth.


Descartes affirms that he can imagine distinctly the characteristic of


quantity which is called continuous in the philosophical sense, when he


reflects upon the idea of matter. In addition, he can imagine the extension of


the material object with its correlate length, breadth, and depth.


Furthermore, it is clear to him that he can enumerate all the many attributes


of matter. These attributes constitute size, figure, situations, and local


motions. Each motion, he asserts, can be assigned certain degrees of duration.


Therefore, Descartes accounts for the phenomena of time.


Continuing his analysis, introspectively regarding his ideas concerning


matter, Descartes asserts that all material objects contain a definite nature.


There is a determined form or essence to each object. This essence is


immutable and eternal. For instance, he can formulate a clear and distinct


idea of a triangle. The triangle possesses a distinct form or essence. My


knowledge of this essence proceeds from my reason alone, asserts Descartes.


Obviously he can never sense an essence. The form is abstracted through the


intellectual processes of the mind. Since the idea in the mind is both clear


and distinct, he knows it is a true idea of material reality. Material objects


must therefore exist. The qualities which he imputes to material objects must


similarly exist.


Descartes demonstrates the existence of God in the same manner. He has an


idea in his mind of a perfect God. This is a clear and distinct idea. Because


the clear ideas are true, he may proceed with an analysis of the concept of


perfection. A thing cannot be perfect if it is merely imagined in his mind. A


perfect object is truly perfect only when it includes the attribute of


existence. Therefore, the idea of a perfect God necessarily includes


existence. Hence, God exists.


Having demonstrated the existence of God to his own satisfaction,


Descartes uses this knowledge to strengthen his affirmation that material


objects have a real existence. It is evident that if material objects had no


real existence and I possessed a clear and distinct idea of their existence,


God would be guilty of deception. All clear and distinct ideas proceed from


God. However, God is perfect and cannot possess any imperfection. We would be


forced to assume He was imperfect if he deceived us into believing the clear


and distinct idea regarding the existence of material objects. Therefore, the


existence of a perfect God insures our belief that material objects truly


exist as our clear and distinct ideas reveal.


Descartes anticipates several possible objections to his position. It


might be argued that there is a real distinction between essence and


existence. Hence, my idea of the essence of a perfect God does not include the


concept of existence. Descartes replies that in God essence is existence.


Existence is the supreme perfection and can never be separated from essence.


Since essence and existence are one, the argument has no weight.


Another argument might be proposed from the possibility that Descartes


cannot be certain that his analysis of corporeal nature does not proceed from


a dream state. In fact, what he considers material might be pure illusion.


Descartes replies that it is irrelevant whether he is dreaming or awake. He


still has a clear and distinct idea in his mind. Clear and distinct ideas are


necessarily true. Consequently, his idea of material nature must be true.


Comment:


When Descartes reflected upon the nature of intuition, he evolved his


criteria of truth. An object is truthful when the idea of it in the mind is


clear and distinct. An idea is clear when the concept stimulates the will to


accept it as true. This is a forceful stimulation. An idea is distinct when


the concept is so precise and so different from all other ideas that the will


is moved and the intellect is forced to comprehend it.


Meditation VI


In this, the final meditation, Descartes continues his demonstration of


the validity of his idea of the existence of material reality. He finally


discusses the difference between the soul and the body in man.


Summary.


While his ideas regarding material things must certainly be accepted as


true, Descartes wonders if material things have a real existence independently


of his ideas. Although he is more certain regarding the idea of his own


existence and the existence of God, Descartes believes that it is certain that


there is a material existence. The fact that mathematics describes material


objects with clear and distinct ideas supports the fact of the objective


existence of material reality.


Descartes begins his intellectual demonstration of the certainty of


material existence by distinguishing between the imagination and intellection


or conception. It is possible for him to imagine the existence of a triangle


or even a pentagon. Through his imagination he is able to conceive a picture


of three sides or another picture of five sides. However, he asserts it is


impossible for his to imagine a chiliagon, which is a thousand-sided figure.


Although he cannot imagine a chiliagon, he can conceive it intellectually.


Evidently there is a special effort of the human mind which adds to the action


of imagination. This suggests to Descartes that imagination indicates the


mere probability of material existence while intellection may infer the


necessity of material existence. It is not possible to make a necessary


inference of corporeal existence from imagination because intellection is


necessary to the act of imagination.


Proceeding further, Descartes recalls many of the concepts which he


believed were true in the past upon the basis of sense information alone. It


is his intention to examine the reasons for doubting the existence of these


things in order to inquire into those ideas he ought to accept as clearly


and distinctly true.


In the past Descartes asserts that he believed that he had no


knowledge unless it proceeded through the senses. As a result, his ideas were


lacking in clarity and distinction. Such a belief leads inevitably to


skepticism and complete doubt of everything.


It was natural for him to accept the erroneous belief that knowledge


proceeded through the senses. His first perception indicates that he


possesses a head, hands, feet, composing a material body. His sensations,


further indicated that he enjoyed pleasure and suffered pain. He experienced


sensually the variety of passions such as joy, sadness, and anger. These


sensations occur through no deliberation or act of his will. They appear


involuntarily and therefore suggest the existence of an outside cause. Yet


Descartes asserts that it is not possible to affirm the existence of material


objects which exist independently of himself with clear and distinct truths.


As he grew older and acquired many more experiences, Descartes realized


the weaknesses inherent in thinking that material reality exists as a result


of sense knowledge alone. With increasing experiences, Descartes’ faith in the


validity of sense knowledge weakened by degrees. It was apparent to him that


the same object appeared differently upon separate occasions when sensed. For


instance, a tower might appear round when viewed on one occasion and again


seem square when inspected from another vantagepoint upon a different


occasion. It is evident that sense information leads to errors in human


judgment.


If he were to depend upon sense knowledge alone, it would be impossible


for him to determine whether or not he was asleep or awake. The same senses


present a reality to the dreaming mind that is pure illusion, but that


indicate extra-mental reality to the awakened mind. How then can anyone be


certain as to the existence of material reality? Although my sense impressions


are independent of my will, Descartes states, I cannot draw the conclusion


that what senses reputedly represent has real existence. Descartes believes


that he cannot be certain that his sensation proceeds from a sensed object.


Nor can he be certain that the object exists in reality as the senses report


it.


At present, Descartes asserts that he knows clearly that he was produced


by God as a thinking being. With the certain knowledge of his own thinking


existence, he began to know himself better and to recognize the Author of his


existence.


Descartes declares that he possesses a passive faculty by which he is


enabled to receive sense impressions. This suggests the presence of an active


faculty existing independently of his mind. The active faculty produces the


images which are received in my mind. Now, this active faculty must be either


God or some object existing independently of my mind. Descartes affirms that


it could never be God. Sense knowledge is frequently erroneous, and


obviously God cannot be the source of error. Therefore, he concludes that


these ideas arise from the presence of a corporeal object which exists in


reality.


There are some material objects which are particular in nature. For


example, objects such as the sun are not so clearly understood. Descartes


asserts that the source of belief resides in God. God cannot deceive because


deception is an imperfection. Because of His perfect nature, God presents


ideas that are clear and distinct to the mind. Consequently, we ought to


accept these ideas as true. There exists, therefore, a material reality


composed of material and at times corporeal existence. Furthermore, God is the


cause of nature and nature teaches one that material reality exists. Nature


teaches Descartes that he possesses a material body. The feelings of hunger,


thirst, and pain are real and exist because he has a material body. Evidently


the mind is not the source of hunger. Therefore we ought to accept the


evidence of material existence which nature dictates.


Descartes believes that he is lodged in his body as a pilot lives in a


ship. As a result, his mind and his body compose a certain type of unity. The


feelings he experiences, such as those that evoke pleasure and pain, are a


confusing mode of thinking which results from the interaction of the mind with


the body. The needs of the body exist because of the materialistic and


mechanical nature of the body. These are known by the mind.


Nature teaches that other bodies exist. It is apparent that they exist


from the interaction between his body and other material bodies. Some material


objects are a source of pleasure and other objects represent a source of pain


to the body. Although nature may lead man to desire the wrong thing, nature is


never the cause of error. Error resides in human judgment. For instance,


nature may lead one to desire poisoned food. Nature impels one to desire this


food because of the agreeable taste of food, not because there is poison in


the food. It is human judgment that determines whether or not the food ought


to be taken. Therefore, neither nature nor our bodies deceive us.


There are enormous differences between the mind and the body. The mind of


man is not divisible. The body may lose one of its parts, such as a foot, but


will continue to function. However, the mind may never be diminished. The mind


may receive sense impressions from the brain, and as a result act in its


thought processes with unity. It does not receive impressions directly from


the separate parts of the body.


Descartes asserts his clear conviction that he is a thinking being and


therefore spiritual in nature. He is therefore distinct in kind from the


material nature of his body. His mind inhabits the body. Because the mind


must interact with the body, it is understandable that errors might be


possible due to the weakness and imperfection of such a union. Realizing this


imperfection places the mind on guard against the possibility of error. The


importance of restraining the will to move only towards those ideas that are


clear and distinct is imperative if we are to avoid error.


Comment:


Descartes affirms that the nature or essence of matter is extension. The


essence of mind is thinking. Consequently, the two realities exist. Both are


different from each other in kind. This position of metaphysical dualism is


central to the question of man’s nature.


Since the mind and the body are distinct in kind, the problem arises


regarding the interaction of the two. How is it possible for an immaterial


substance to come into contact with a material substance? Descartes affirms


simply that they do.


The statement of Descartes that he inhabits his body like a pilot in a


vessel is revealing in the light of the above question. The body is


strictly a mechanical and machine-like substance. Its functions are entirely


different from those of the spirit. The spirit is synonymous with mind. The


purposes of this mind are unique. The mind serves as the director of the body.


It functions as the intellectual agent of the body. However, the purpose of the spirit or mind is not limited to any functional operations of a united


body and spirit. The mind is the source of one’s individual ego or identity.


This ego is distinct from the spirit of the infinite ego which is God.


Therefore, another dualism exists in Descartes’ view. This latter dualism


distinguishes Descartes from the metaphysical view of Hegel.


31e

Сохранить в соц. сетях:
Обсуждение:
comments powered by Disqus

Название реферата: Descartes 2 Essay Research Paper DESCARTES

Слов:5778
Символов:38091
Размер:74.40 Кб.