Meditations on First Philosophy

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Meditation IV God is not a Deceiver, Truth Criterion & Problem of Error.
Advertisements

What is it like to be me? Trying to understand consciousness.
The ontological argument. I had the persuasion that there was absolutely nothing in the world, that there was no sky and no earth, neither minds nor.
Descartes God.
Cartesian Dualism. Real Distinction Argument P1.Whatever can be clearly and distinctly conceived apart can exist apart. P2.Whatever can exist apart are.
Descartes’ rationalism
Descartes’ rationalism
Descartes’ trademark argument Michael Lacewing
Descartes on Certainty (and Doubt)
The Rationalists: Descartes Certainty: Self and God
Philosophy 024: Big Ideas Prof. Robert DiSalle Talbot College 408, x85763 Office Hours: Monday and Wednesday.
Meditation One What is the objective of the Meditations? Hint: look at second sentence of Med. I.
Sources of knowledge: –Sense experience (empiricism) –Reasoning alone (rationalism) We truly know only that of which we are certain (a priori). Since sense.
Descartes on scepticism
Meditation Two Cogito Ergo Sum. Cogito #1 Cogito as Inference □ (Ti→Ei). Not: □ (Ei)
Results from Meditation 2
Descartes’ Epistemology
Philosophy of Mind Week 3: Objections to Dualism Logical Behaviorism
Descartes’ First Meditation
Finding our way back  The initial result of Descartes’ use of hyperbolic doubt is the recognition that at least one thing cannot be doubted, at least.
Philosophy of Mind Week 2: Descartes and Dualism
Philosophy 1050: Introduction to Philosophy Week 10: Descartes and the Subject: The way of Ideas.
Rene Descartes 1596—1650. Some dates 1543: publication of Copernicus’s De Revolutionibus 1543: publication of Copernicus’s De Revolutionibus 1633: Galileo.
Epistemology Section 1 What is knowledge?
Is God a Deceiver? (P1)The idea I have of God is of an infinitely perfect being. (P2)The cause of such an idea must itself be infinitely perfect. (P3)Therefore,
PHL105Y November 1, 2004 For Wednesday, read Descartes’s Third Meditation. Brace yourself: it is very hard. The final version of your first essay is due.
Descartes’ Meditations
© Michael Lacewing Doubt in Descartes’ Meditations Michael Lacewing
Descartes Meditations. Knowledge needs a foundation Descartes knows he has false beliefs, but he does not know which ones are false So, we need a method.
René Descartes ( AD) Meditations on First Philosophy (1641) (Text, pp )
René Descartes ( ) Father of modern rationalism.
Introduction to Philosophy Lecture 12 Minds and bodies #1 (Descartes) By David Kelsey.
Descartes' Evil Demon Hypothesis:
René Descartes ( AD) Meditations on First Philosophy (1641) (Text, pp ) Revised, 8/20/15.
L ECTURE 6: D ESCARTES. L ECTURE O UTLINE In today’s lecture we will: 1.Become introduced to Rene Descartes 2.Begin our investigation into Descartes’
1 The Rationalists: Descartes The Material World Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana Jack Nichols, Living in the material world.
Varieties of Scepticism. Academic Scepticism Arcesilaus, 6 th scolarch of the Academy Arcesilaus, 6 th scolarch of the Academy A return to the Socratic.
René Descartes, Meditations Introduction to Philosophy Jason M. Chang.
Descartes’ Interactionist Dualism. Overview Descartes’ general project Descartes’ general project Argument for dualism Argument for dualism Explanation.
Descates Meditations II A starting point for reconstructing the world.
Anselm’s “1st” ontological argument Something than which nothing greater can be thought of cannot exist only as an idea in the mind because, in addition.
A posteriori Knowledge A priori knowledge A posteriori knowledge is based on experience. A posteriori knowledge is based on experience. A priori knowledge.
René Descartes Brandon Lee Block D.
Lauren Dobbs “Cogito ergo sum”. Bio  Descartes was a French born philosopher from the 1600’s.  He’s most famous for his “Meditations on First Philosophy”
Chapter 3: Knowledge The Rationalist’s Confidence: Descartes Introducing Philosophy, 10th edition Robert C. Solomon, Kathleen Higgins, and Clancy Martin.
Meditations: 3 & 4.
An Outline of Descartes's Meditations on First Philosophy
Descartes II. First Argument for the Existence of God (P1)There must be at least as much reality and perfection in a cause as in its effect. (P2)If an.
DESCARTES: MEDITATION 3 OR: THE WORLD REGAINED — WITH CERTAINTY(?)
1. I exist, because I think. 2. I am a thinking thing 3
Meditation Three Of God: That He Exists.
Meditation Six Of God: That He Exists.
Intuition and deduction thesis (rationalism)
Skepticism Introduction.
Meditation Two Cogito Ergo Sum.
Descartes’ proof of the external world
Descartes, Meditations 1 and 2
On your whiteboard: What is empiricism? Arguments/evidence for it?
Descartes -- Meditations Four
Introduction to Philosophy Lecture 7 Berkeley
Descartes -- Meditations Three
Dualism.
Meditation 2: The Nature of the Mind, which is Better Known than the Body Descartes Meditation I.
Meditation Two Cogito Ergo Sum.
Meditation Three Of God: That He Exists.
Three kinds of dependence
¶1 – Intro “I have seen what to do and what to avoid in order to reach the truth” Namely, separate what’s clear from what’s obscure, trust my clear and.
Epistemology “Episteme” = knowledge “Logos” = words / study of
God is not a Deceiver, Truth Criterion & Problem of Error
Descartes and Hume on knowledge of the external world
Presentation transcript:

Meditations on First Philosophy Summary of Descartes’ arguments

Meditation I 1. A firm foundation for the sciences requires a truth that is absolutely certain; for this purpose, I will reject all my beliefs for which there is even a possibility of doubt, and whatever truths are left will be absolutely certain.

I continued 2. To this end it is not necessary to go through all my beliefs individually, since they are all based on a more fundamental belief. If there is any reason to doubt this foundation belief, then all the beliefs based on it are equally doubtful.

Meditation I continued 3. All my beliefs about the world are based on the fundamental belief that the senses tell me the truth. But this belief is not absolutely certain. It is at least possible that everything my senses tell me is an illusion created by a powerful being. Therefore, there is some reason to doubt my foundation belief, and thus all my beliefs about the world are doubtful; none of them can serve as the foundation for science.

Meditation II 1. If all my beliefs about the world are doubtful, is there any truth which can be absolutely certain? Yes. Even if all of my experience is an illusion, it cannot be doubted that the experience is taking place. And this means that I, the experiencer, must exist. 2. Since the only evidence I have that I exist is that I am thinking (experiencing), then it is also absolutely certain that I am a thing that thinks (experiences), that is, a mind.

Meditation II continued 3. Since I am not certain (yet) that the physical world (including my body) exists, but I am certain that I exist, it follows that I am not my body. Therefore, I know with certainty that I am only a mind. 4. I am much more certain of my mind's existence than my body's. It might seem that in fact we know physical things through the senses with greater certainty than we know something intangible like the mind.

Meditation II continued But the wax experiment demonstrates that the senses themselves know nothing, and that only the intellect truly knows physical things. It follows that the mind itself is known with greater certainty than anything that we know through the senses.

Meditation III 1. Every idea must be caused, and the cause must be as real as the idea. If I have any idea of which I cannot be the cause, then something besides me must exist. 2. All ideas of material reality could have their origin within me. But the idea of God, an infinite and perfect being, could not have originated from within me, since I am finite and imperfect.

III continued 3. I have an idea of God, and it can only have been caused by God. 4. Therefore God exists.

Meditation IV 1. Only an imperfect (less than perfectly good) being could practice deliberate deception. Therefore, God is no deceiver. 2. Since my faculty of judgment comes from God, I can make no mistake as long as I use it properly. But it is not an infinite faculty; I make mistakes when I judge things that I don't really know.

IV continued 3. God also gave me free will, which is infinite and therefore extends beyond my finite intellect. This is why it is possible to deceive myself: I am free to jump to conclusions or to proclaim as knowledge things that I don't know with absolute certainty.

IV continued 4. I therefore know now that if I know something with absolute certainty (clearly and distinctly), then I cannot be mistaken, because God is no deceiver. The correct way to proceed is to avoid mistakes and limit my claims to knowledge to those things I know clearly and distinctly.

Meditation V 1. Now I want to find what can be known for certain about material objects. Before deciding whether they exist outside me, I know that my ideas of them consist of shape, size, motion, etc. I also know that by thinking about these attributes I can discover certain facts that are necessarily true about them (the truths of geometry, for example). 2. I do not invent ideas such as geometrical shapes, nor do I get them from sensory experience. Proof of this is the fact that I can discover geometrical truths about figures which I cannot imagine.

V continued 3. Just as, by thinking about my ideas of geometrical shapes, I can discover truths that necessarily belong to them, I can do the same with God. I have a clear and distinct idea of a perfect being. Perfect = lacking nothing. I cannot conceive of a being that is perfect but lacks existence. Therefore, existence necessarily belongs to God.

V continued 4. This doesn't mean that my thinking of something makes it exist. If I conceive of a triangle, I must conceive of a figure whose angles equal two right angles. But it doesn't follow that the triangle must exist. But God is different. God, being perfect, is the one being to whom existence must belong. Thus, when I conceive of God, I must conceive of a being that exists.

V continued 5. Because God, being perfect, is not a deceiver, I know that once I have perceived something clearly and distinctly to be true, it will remain true, even if later I forget the reasoning that led me to that conclusion. I could not have this certainty about anything if I did not know God.

Meditation VI 1. All that is left is to determine whether material objects exist with certainty. I know that the abstract shapes representing them are real, since I perceive them clearly and distinctly in geometry. 2. Furthermore, I have a faculty of imagination, by which I can conceive of material objects, and which is different from my intellect. That it is different is proven by my ability to do geometry with unimaginable figures. Only intellect is necessary for my existence.

VI continued 3. The most likely explanation for the existence of my faculty of imagination is that my mind is joined with a body that has sense organs. This is even more likely in the case of the faculty of sensation. 4. It formerly seemed that all my knowledge of objects came through the senses, that their ideas originated from and corresponded to objects outside me. It also seemed that my body belonged especially to me, although I did not understand the apparent connection between mind and body.

VI continued 5. Then I found it possible to doubt everything. Now I am in the process of systematically removing doubts where certainty exists. 6. Now that I know God can create anything just as I apprehend it, the distinctness of two things in my mind is sufficient to conclude that they really are distinct. Thus I know I exist, I am a thinking thing, and although I may possess a body, "it is certain that this I is entirely and absolutely distinct from my body, and can exist without it."

VI continued 7. My faculty of sensing is passive and thus presupposes a faculty of causing sensation, which cannot be within me, since some ideas come to me without my cooperation and even against my will; it therefore belongs to something else. This is either a body or God. But since God is not a deceiver, he doesn't plant these ideas directly in me (doesn't make me believe in a nonexistent world). Therefore corporeal things exist. My senses might mislead me about the details, but I know at least that the ideas that I clearly and distinctly understand--geometrical properties--belong to these bodies.

VI continued 8. Nature is God's order; thus it has truth to teach me. For example, that I am present to my body in a more intimate way than a pilot in a ship. And that there are other bodies around me that affect me in various ways, that should be pursued or avoided; the senses thus act to preserve and maintain the body.

VI continued 9. But I also make some judgments on my own that are not justified by nature's teachings, particularly in assuming objects and their qualities to be exactly as my senses report them, that sense qualities reside in them, etc. It is the fault of my judgment that I use sense perception as a direct apprehension of the essences of external bodies; there is nothing inherently deceptive about sensation.

VI continued 10. Another problem is the misleading signals I sometimes get from my own body, which induce me to commit errors. A body with edema, for example, will have an inclination to drink, when in fact this is something it ought to avoid. How can God permit this? 11. The body is divisible, the mind is not. Further, the mind gets impressions from the parts of the body not immediately, but via the brain.

VI continued 12. By using more than one sense, and memory, I can avoid errors of the senses of this kind. So I should get rid of the excessive doubts I started with, especially those premised on dreaming, since I can easily distinguish dreaming from waking by the continuity of the latter. I can trust the truth of my ideas as long as my senses, memory, and understanding are all consistent with one another.

Close the book Questions??