Descartes Argumentative Essay

Descartes is now clear on his perception of God so he looks at material things. He points out that a body must exist in reality, because for him to dream about his body, it must exist before he would know what to dream about. So although he can perceive qualities of material things, he is still confused about some things because of is imperfect perception. He concludes that the senses are meant to help him get around in the world, not to lead him to the truth. ( SparkNotes Editors, 2012 )

Descartes’s mission in the meditations was to doubt everything and that what remained from his doubting could be considered the truth. This lead Descartes to argue for the existence of God. For the purpose of this paper, I will first discuss Descartes’s argument for the existence of God. I will then take issue with Descartes’s argument first with his view on formal reality and varying levels of reality, then with his argument that only God can cause the idea of God. I will then conclude with

     On the journey to find truth to base all thought upon, Descartes explains his first step in doing so. “Never accept anything for true which I did not clearly know to be such; that is to say, carefully to avoid precipitancy and prejudice, and to comprise nothing more in my judgment than what was presented to my mind so clearly and distinctly as to exclude all ground of doubt.”(Kolak, Pg.228). Assuming that everything you see is fictitious, Descartes believed he had no senses at all; “body, shape, extension, motion, and place are unreal.”(Weissman, Pg.23). Our senses have failed us all at one point or another in our lives, so why use the senses as a base for thought? The most famous quote and philosophy by Descartes in history ever, “Je pense, donc je suis, cogito ergo sum” (Durant, Pg.639). “I think, therefore I am” was the first step towards a basis to understand truth, and leaning away from truth through the senses.

By the start of Meditation Four Descartes has established the reliability of his clear and distinct criterion of knowledge, and he has concluded that he exists as an essentially thinking thing and that the idea of an infinite, perfect being entails God's existence. Descartes has also eliminated concern about being systematically deceived, since acting in such a way would be indicative of some deficiency rather than the exercise of some power, and God is perfect. This generates further questions, as humans do regularly judge falsely, even without the meddling of a malicious, deceptive being (99). Given God's nature, attributing error to him is unacceptable, but, conversely, how could humans be blamed for the faulty faculty of judgement that

The purpose of the wax argument is designed to provide a clear and distinct knowledge of “I”, which is the mind, while corporeal things, “whose images are framed by thought, and which the senses themselves imagine are much more distinctly known than this mysterious ‘I’ which does not fall within the imagination” (66). Through the wax argument, Descartes’ demonstrates that corporeal things are perceived neither through our senses nor imagination, but through our intellect alone. In this argument, you will see that there is cause to doubt Descartes’ analysis of the wax and his method of philosophical reasoning.

Sicinnos, a handsome individual, who lived in Pylos who caused the tulips different colors as his moods changed. The hero, Sicinnos, went on a lofty quest to kill the Maeonian Drakon. Sicinnos declared he would go on the journey to Pylos. During the time that Sicinnos reached Maeonia, the Maeonian Drakon was feasting on Macedonian villagers. Sicinnos quaffed down his fear and showed bravery, therefore turned an array of white tulips to red. Afterwards, Sicinnois let his fear show in private, and his feelings turned a white cluster of tulips to turquoise. Sicinnos did not act arrogant about his triumph of defeating the Meonian Drakon. Also, Sicinnos did not violate his humility. On his way back home to Pylos from his expedition, Sicinnos saw a young maiden detained by chains and was in jeopardy of getting eaten by the fearsome Chimera.

The body may still exist, but he wouldn’t be aware of it. Descartes observes a piece of wax to try and discern what “I” means as well as what a body is. I dint quite understand the experiment until I read: “Surely I am aware of my own self in a truer and more certain way than I am of the wax, and also in a much more distinct and evident way. What leads me to think that the wax exists—namely, that I see it—leads much more obviously to the conclusion that I exist” (Descartes 7-8). I took from this that because Descartes senses the wax that must mean he exists because if he was nothing how could he possibly think he sees the wax. He endorses his claim by stating: “I now know that even bodies are perceived not by the senses or by imagination but by the intellect alone, not through their being touched or seen but through their being understood” (Descartes 8). I interpreted this claim as I can perceive my body not by pinching my arm or conjuring the image of it in my head, but by acknowledging its extension of my mind. Descartes continues to explore the concept of the body as being an extension, though it is unique and distinct from the immaterial.

Descartes presents ideas that could possibly prove the mind-body singularity. He realizes he perceives colour and sound through his senses and also with the help of his memory. This means that these perceptions appear to have reached his imagination. Descartes speculates that the things he perceives may help prove that bodies exist. However, he soon realizes that it was in fact external bodies that caused him to have these perceptions, realizing that his senses have deceived him since he has had the same perceptions whilst being awake as well as when he is dreaming. Sensory experiences are equally present in ones’ dreams, yet the senses are not being activated. All that can be certain is the experience, not that the experience is the result of the contribution from ones’ senses. With this newly developed idea, experiences, independent of their cause, can be nothing more than a mere form of thinking and therefore a product of one’s imagination (25), meaning they are entirely independent of a body, and so do not require one. This is a first advancement on the idea of the mind-body duality. Descartes proceeds to bring forward the idea that all that is immediately available to the mind is perceptual experience. Regardless of what lies beyond that experience in the external world, Descartes believes that it is very certain that he sees light, hears noise and feels heat; and these are all a property of perception, and this, when interpreted in this precise sense, can be

In Meditations on First Philosophy, Descartes argues that the mind and the body are distinct because the differ in their essence, especially their essence of thinking, extension, and divisibility. In this essay, I will argue that Descartes’ argument is unsound, because his claim on the indivisibility and non-extension of the mind for his argument appears to be false based on modern studies and research on cases of mental illness and the brain’s connection to the mind. Furthermore, his mere assumption about the existence of the mind can also result in his premise about the mind’s essence to be false if the mind doesn’t actually exist. However, Descartes might respond that I am viewing his argument in the incorrect way, where in the text his

The contention is erroneous. It depends on possibility situated in obliviousness. Descartes has excluded anything in the contention to avoid the likelihood that he, as a reasoning thing, is in certainty an intricate material framework. He has only depended on the way that he can question the presence of matter to presume that matter is unmistakable from brain.

Heaving, she flings herself at the mercy of the bed after latching her cell door. The taste of Sébastien's blood lingers in her mouth, metallic and salty, tender are her breasts where the beast has pawed her and she trembles with rage at the recall. “I saw the demon who owns his soul” she whispers, stunned. At the same time, in the parlor, Sébastien heaves uncontrollably. Mad at himself for the reckless action which he has misjudged and was incapable of carrying to its end. As it turns out, the frail, slender and delicate Madonna has surprised him with a speedy and mercurial riposte. What combativeness in this slip of a woman. And, how she deceived him, guarding herself while protecting her Angel from my inquisition. He dreamed of bending this

In Meditations on First Philosophy, Descartes argues that the mind and the body are distinct on the grounds that one can clearly and distinctly conceive of the mind without the body. In this essay, I will argue that Descartes’ argument is unsound, because merely conceiving something does not make it so. However, Descartes might respond that I am viewing his argument in the incorrect way, where in the text his argument actually focuses on the difference between the mind and the body’s essence rather than about their conceivability, but nevertheless, I would still argue that his argument is unsound, because his claim on the indivisibility and the non-extension of the mind for his argument appears to be false based on modern studies and researches.

In the fifth meditation Descartes talks about things. These things beings objects all have existed outside of the mind and still have a being. For example, if I were thinking of an object with three sides, it must be a triangle, even if I don’t know what the word is, it is still a triangle that I am thinking about. The triangle must have properties (three sides) that must associate itself with that shape. Though I may not know the name I understand the properties of something with three sides, which must be a triangle. Descartes then goes onto connect the triangle, and objects, with the existence of God. He says that if the essence of God exists in his mind then God must exist must like if he is thinking of three sides then he must be thinking of a triangle. If the qualities of God are clear in his mind then the existence of God must be true. Descartes argues that if science and math claim that if you are thinking of something with three sides in your head it must be a triangle, then thinking of clearly distinct properties like all knowing, all powerful, everlasting must also be able to be proven like wise. This proof relies heavily on perceptions like the last proof and relies heavily on the aspect of

Our knowledge of the external world is always subject to debate, no matter the philosophical preference of those who argue it. John Locke, the founder of empiricism, has an excellent argument for how we as humans acquire knowledge. His argument states that we can only acquire knowledge from external experiences. (Locke 238). Essentially saying, that we must experience something prior in order to have knowledge about it. Rene Descartes, would disagree with Locke in the way we acquire knowledge. Descartes believes that knowledge of the external world can be acquired from intuition and deduction into showing that God exists and therefore, the external world exists. (Descartes 203) In this paper, I will disprove Descartes’ theory of knowledge

It is during the fifth meditation where Descartes really begins to go deep inside the existence of God and tries to uncover the proof behind his thoughts. Descartes said, “I can be certain that I exist, but I cannot be certain there is a world outside me,” (Skirry). With this, he needed a bridge to get him from his own experience to something external to his mind. What could that bridge be? Well he thought that it would have to be a good God. Not just a God, but a good one. Good so that he wouldn’t want to deceive us or make us think mistaken things about the world outside us, just as long as we use our facilities, our sense of perception and our reason responsibly. So, he gave two arguments for the existence of God. The argument about the very