Essay about Descartes View on the Senses

He discusses about how everything he perceives is based on his “sensor data”, or the information that obtained through the five senses (touch, smell, sight, taste, and hearing). Although, he describes that the senses can also be deceived. For example, the initiation of an image when we experience mirages, or seeing hallucinations after taking meditation. Ideally, he argues that the simple 5 senses are not reliable as well. He then moves to the idea of God and religion, and that there is an evil deceiver or demon that is responsible for his deceived senses. He justifies that God is good, and there’s no way God would allow that to happen. In his second mediation, he explains the nature of the human mind and how it is better than the body. Descartes states that it’s impossible to doubt that God exists because it would mean the doubt your own existence. He then clarifies that he is a “thinking” thing, which then becomes his only valid statements as the previous statements were contradicting each other. In other words, I think, therefore I am. Descartes then approaches the physical aspects of beings, and talks about how wax, when cold, has all of its properties, and when it’s next to a fire becomes a puddle, but it’s still wax. He then takes that same idea and says that this could happen to the body as well. He comes to the conclusion that no matter what has occurred to the body, physically, it is still taking up space in the world. The only thing he can only rely on is

In Descartes’ First Meditation, Descartes’ overall intention is to present the idea that our perceptions and sensations are flawed and should not be trusted entirely. His purpose is to create the greatest possible doubt of our senses. To convey this thought, Descartes has three main arguments in the First Meditation: The dream argument, the deceiving God argument, and the evil demon “or evil genius”. Descartes’ dream argument argues that there is no definite transition from a dream to reality, and since dreams are so close to reality, one can never really determine whether they are dreaming

There are three forms of doubts that Descartes believes in, one of which is the defective nature of doubt. The defective nature of doubt is reasonable because it gives Descartes a clean slate to begin doubting everything he’s uncertain of. Because Descartes wants knowledge and truth, he starts to look to doubt. To gain knowledge and truth one must have cautious perceptive that contains no doubt. Therefore, Descartes thinks that since the foundation of his knowledge had uncertain characteristics, he must take apart his knowledge and destroy everything he thought he knew. Then he starts to build his knowledge back up but only with things that he is certain of.

In order to weigh up these arguments, it is important to understand Descartes’ reasons for formulating them: Descartes’ believes that it is important to be certain of the things that one believes to be true which, in turn, causes him to question the things that he has been certain of thus far. Because of this, he forms these arguments to further consider his theories about doubt and what it is to be truly certain of anything.

Descartes aim throughout the first segment of his Meditations to overthrow existing foundations of knowledge and encourages readers to remove prior knowledge and prejudices in order to fully accept the new foundations which he aims to establish. The method of doubt is used to find beliefs that can serve as a new foundation for knowledge. Only beliefs that are certain, immune from doubt, can perform this function. Descartes argued that what we believe on the basis of the senses cannot meet the standard. Consequently, he concluded, we do not know anything on the basis of our senses and the dream argument is formed.

In this section I will thoroughly discuss and explore both of Descartes arguments. Firstly, scepticism is the doubting of knowledge or the doubting of a belief. Descartes holds the view that to know something or attain a certain belief for example God is omnibenevolent, I must know that God is omnibenevolent, believe that God is omnibenevolent and have reasoning/evidence that God is omnibenevolent. I think Descartes definition of knowledge is logical because again using the example God is omnibenevolent, I can’t know that God is omnibenevolent if I don’t believe that it is true and if I have no justification or reasoning for believing that God is omnibenevolent then I can’t possibly be certain that He is omnibenevolent. Descartes believes without knowing, believing and having reasoning/evidence, I cannot know that God is real. Descartes argues that “it is prudent never to trust completely those who have deceived us even once” . Descartes argues that you cannot trust someone or something which has made you believe or accept a false truth. For example, in Descartes 6th Meditation he writes “sometimes towers which had looked round from a distance appeared square from close up; and enormous statues standing on their pediments did not seem large when observed from the ground”. This indicates that it is very easy to be deceived by someone or something which results in someone believing a false truth therefore I agree with Descartes that you cannot trust something which has deceived you more than once. Furthermore, looking at Descartes dreaming argument, the dreaming argument is an argument which infers when you are asleep, you can have dreams which do not allow you to distinguish whether you are asleep or awake. Dreams very often lead the dreamer to believing false situations which does not enable to dreamer to know they are asleep. The dreaming argument is about if you should trust

In Meditations on First Philosophy, René Descartes philosophies made a substantial advancement in enabling us to understand the world around us by querying many of the Aristotelian doctrines that are still being discussed in philosophy today. He attempts to answer the question; can you fully trust your senses? Descartes uses methodological doubt, which is a process of being skeptical about truths of someone’s belief to revoke from his senses. In Meditation One: Concerning Those Things That Can Be Called into Doubt, he argues that people cannot rely on their senses for full truths. Descartes says we must question everything and doubt everything because everything in this world is subjective as opposed to objective. He begins to argue by saying how when he was a child he believed certain things to be true but then later found out the real truth. Within his first meditation he uses an example of dreaming to prove how our senses deceive us. In Meditation Two: Concerning the Nature of the Human Mind: That the Mind is More Known Than the Body, Descartes starts off by questioning God and Heaven and provides another example of the ball of wax to support his ideas of how our senses cannot be fully trusted. Descartes does a fantastic job proving that the mind and body are disconnected and therefore we cannot trust our senses.

Descartes claims that sensation is deceptive, and therefore cannot be trusted. He says that our senses tell us that distant objects are small, when they are actually large. Descartes goes on to state that “it is unwise to trust completely those who have deceived us even once” (Descartes, First Meditation, 2). Descartes then proceeds to prove his claims about human knowledge through deductive reasoning. First, he claims that sensation is deceitful, so we cannot trust anything that our bodies or senses perceive. Next, Descartes states that if God is

In the first meditation, "Concerning those things that can be called into doubt", Descartes main goal is to distinguish what it is he can take to be true, and what supposed truths hold even the smallest degree of doubt. When he reviews all of his opinions he concludes "eventually [he] is forced to admit that there is nothing among the things [he]believed to be true which it is not permissable to doubt--and not out of frivolity or lack of forethought, but for valid and considered reasons. Thus [he] must be no less careful to withhold assent henceforth even from these beliefs then [he] would from those that are patently false, if [he wishes] to find anything certain."(Pg62) At the beginning of Descartes' meditations, he finds that there is really no concrete pillars of knowledge to base the foundations of his supposed

Descartes as a rationalist believes that knowledge comes from the mind alone. During the First Meditation, Descartes came to the conclusion that there must be some kind of evil deceiver that "leads him to a state of doubt" (Descartes 77). Descartes starts out with the fact that distant sensations are subject to doubt and uncertainty. He then goes on to try and cast doubt onto close sensations. Descartes starts off by stating that close sense perception must be certain because we are not crazy, and only a insane person would doubt what was right in front of them. Descartes then uses the dream argument to cast uncertainty on close sense perception because "they are as lively, vivid and clear as reality is when we are awake" (Descartes 76). Descartes then states that geometry and math are certain. "For whether I am awake or sleeping, two and three added together always make five, and a square never has more than four sides; and it does not seem possible that truths so apparent can be suspected of any falsity or uncertainty" (Descartes 98). Descartes comes to realize this certainty because math, geometry, and the simple sciences can be understood and proved through logic and reasoning. He then uses his Deceiver Argument to cast doubt on close sensations. He questions how we know for certain that God is good, and how we know that

At the beginning of the fourth meditation Descartes has developed three main certainties: 1) God exists. The understanding that God exists, comes from the intellect and not from the senses or the imagination therefore God exists 2) God is not a deceiver because deceiving is a sign of weakness or malice and because God is perfect he would not be allowed to do things of such evil nature. And 3) if God created him, God is responsible for his judgment, and so his ability to judge must be sound; so long as he uses it correctly. Yet, If God has given Descartes indubitable judgment how is it Descartes makes an error from time to time?

René Descartes was a French philosopher and also mathematician. His method of doubt led him to the famous "cogito ergo sum" when translated means "I am thinking, therefore I exist". This cogito was the foundation for Descartes' quest for certain knowledge. He explored doubt and how we can prove our own existence, by taking the first steps of scepticism. His book "Meditations On First Philosophy", was written in six parts. Each representing the six days that God took to create the world. Not to upset the Church, Descartes would need to prove the existence of God, and the soul. Within Descartes' argument, we find some important areas. Two, which require focus, are his

Descartes first submits that it is not necessary to show all beliefs are false to satisfy the knowledge condition. He adds that if in each belief there is doubt that we can conclude that all things that we believe can be considered false knowledge. He seeks to prove this by setting a precondition that we cannot critique all beliefs, just the ones that govern our life or that serve as a broad component of belief. Descartes then provides context to where beliefs come from and states that beliefs are created from senses or through senses. He then states that senses are false because they are deceptive and shouldn’t be trusted which is the first cause of being able to doubt a belief. This idea in my opinion is the argument of Reality vs. Virtually, which is what we encounter through our experiences vs. what we dream about. The question posed is that we doubt our beliefs because we do not know if what we perceive from our senses is true. The example provided in the Meditations text dealt with imagination and the Dream world concept. If I perceive something in the

Descartes’ method of arriving at the conclusion is by starting from scratch and considering whether there could be any ground of doubt for his beliefs. He was a rational philosopher who gave reason the utmost importance and led him to realise that many of his current beliefs were in fact based on uncertainty and thus false conclusions. Therefore, in order to avoid this problem and find secure knowledge of on what he can be certain of, he uses the method of doubting everything that he finds reason to doubt and consequently, being justified in rejecting the whole. He will: ‘withhold my assent from matters which are not entirely certain and indubitable than from those which appear to me manifestly to be false’ (Descartes 1641: 6)