preview

Descartes Meditations On First Philosophy

Decent Essays

Jason Kimko
Prof. Ekstrom
Philosophy 150W
30 September 2014
Cogito Ergo Sum Raised during a time of scientific turmoil following the invention of the telescope and microscope, Descartes sought out to discover in his Meditations on First Philosophy what exactly can be asserted as wholly true and what cannot.
In Meditation I, Descartes begins by casting doubt on the foundation of most ideas: the senses, which are capable of deception such as during a dream. For ideas thought to be more certain, Descartes proposes the existence of an omniscient demon whose sole purpose is to deceive people into thinking something is true when it is really not. In Meditation II, Descartes asserts that the only certainty is the existence of himself as “a thing …show more content…

Therefore, since God is a perfect being and Descartes is not, the idea of God as perfect could not have originated from Descartes, but instead must have been planted by God. In Meditation IV, Descartes explains that God is not a deceiver since deception is dependent on some kind of imperfection and there is no such thing as in imperfect God. How then, Descartes questions, does error exist if we come from a perfect God? He answers that error does not come from the mind itself, but instead from its premature judgments – indicating the gift of free will – and that these errors can be avoided through careful reasoning. Furthermore, things that are once found to be absolutely certain can be viewed as undoubtedly true by principle since God is not a …show more content…

It is from this argument that the common phrase “cogito ergo sum” came into being. Popular belief finds fault in the validity of this phrase given its simplicity and its implications (“Scrutinizing ‘Cogito Ergo Sum’” 1). The interpreted argument of this phrase has the premise that one thinks and the conclusion that one exist. The fault here lies in that this argument is lacking the connecting premise that because one thinks, one must exists – signifying a clear disjunction between the first premise and its conclusion. It is ironic that Descartes assumes this leap in reasoning after deliberating so carefully not to jump to conclusions as mentioned in Meditation IV. Whether this fault invalidates the statement “cogito ergo sum” or not is unclear, yet it can be “clearly and distinctly” (Descartes, line 62) known that the statement is incomplete. Therefore, with the lynchpin of Descartes’ argument against skepticism cast into doubt, the arguments that follow are subsequently cast into doubt as well. For example, the proof of the existence of God is dependent on the existence of the “I” because the “I” must have originated from something of equal or greater finiteness. Therefore, after infinitely many repetitions, the cause must regress to an infinite cause, this being God. However, if the “I” does not exist,

Get Access