Descartes : Who Are You?

to think and reason. His thought and his own mental idea of himself acts as the only

Next, we already have the knowledge that Socrates understands how unwise it is to fear death, but he has a perception of death that grants him serenity and peace about being deceased. He enlightens the jury by explaining, “death is a state of nothingness and utter unconsciousness or a change and migration of the soul from this world to another” (pg. 69). In the majority of cases, humans will innately fear that state of nothingness and uncertainty, however Socrates’ approach differs. Even though this is the worst of the two possibilities when humans die, Socrates views this undisturbed slumber without any dreams or distractions to be a tremendous benefit. Socrates’ ideals mirror that of Ecclesiastes 9:5 which states, “For the living know that they shall die: but the dead know not anything, neither have they any more a reward; for the memory of them is forgotten.” This parallels Socrates claiming that he does not fear death even if it is an

Descartian dualism is one of the most long lasting legacies of Rene Descartes’ philosophy. He argues that the mind and body operate as separate entities able to exist without one another. That is, the mind is a thinking, non-extended entity and the body is non-thinking and extended. His belief elicited a debate over the nature of the mind and body that has spanned centuries, a debate that is still vociferously argued today. In this essay, I will try and tackle Descartes claim and come to some conclusion as to whether Descartes is correct to say that the mind and body are distinct.

With the question of human condition being answered, Socrates now can answer another one of our fundamental questions. This question is Solution. Solution proposes a way to fix what has gone with the world and mankind. In Socrates’ eyes, the world’s greatest problem was the attachment to the human body. He proposes that this can be fixed by detaching oneself from the body. Socrates partially explains this by saying “It seems that so long as we are alive, we shall keep as close as possible to knowledge if we avoid as much as we can all contact and association with the body, except when absolutely necessary; and instead of allowing ourselves to become infected with its nature, purify ourselves from it until God himself gives us deliverance. In this way, by keeping ourselves uncontaminated by the follies of the body, we shall probably reach the company of others like ourselves and gain direct knowledge of all that is pure and uncontaminated – that is, presumably, of Truth.” (Phaedo 67a-b). Socrates also talks about the importance of purification of the mind as another solution, which ends up coming back to the separation of the soul from the body. This can be seen when Socrates

Carefully explain Descartes’ cogito and his attempt to build his knowledge structure from the ground up. (Be as succinct as possible.) Does Descartes succeed or fail in that attempt? Justify your answer in full.

In Phaedo, Socrates defines what he believes the life of a philosopher is. When discussing this topic with his followers, he establishes that “being serious about the so-called pleasures, such as those of food and drink, goes [least] with being a philosophical man” (Phaedo 64D). Instead, he states that “those who philosophize rightly make dying their care” (Phaedo 68A). Through these claims, Socrates establishes that ideal philosophers isolate themselves from certain concepts, such as pleasure, that we associate with being human. Socrates’s views on what happens after death give insight into why he promotes this nature of a philosophical life. He believes that death is the “release and separation of soul from body” (Phaedo 67D). He further uses the argument of contraries to contend that there are opposites in nature and these opposites have “becoming[s] from each member of the

One of the positive effects of such a belief regarding the soul and its existence after the body's physical death is that it can serve as motivation to lead a virtuous life. This fact is readily demonstrated within the speech and actions of Socrates, who attempted to lead a high life of virtue, reasoning, and thinking in order to protect his soul from any sort of debauchery which might affect it in the afterlife. Socrates' conception of the afterlife was somewhat as muddled as Plato's, during The Apology he claimed he knew nothing about it, yet he also asserts that it will either be a restful, lasting slumber or a state in which one has an enjoyable degree of communication with the

In Descartes’ Meditations on First Philosophy, Descartes begins a quest into his own mind and existence by putting all of his beliefs up for questioning in order to determine what can be certain and what can be doubted. He realized that he was able to doubt if he had a body in instances of dreaming or of illusions. But, he was unable to doubt the fact that he had a mind because the mind is the “the thinking thing” that processes all the doubts of his existence. Descartes’ mechanism into figuring out the truth is to doubt everything. Descartes argues that the mind and the body are completely separate entities because of the minds capability to exist on its own. Despite the fact that his argument is well assembled and explained, there are a few doubts and situations which make it unclear as to whether the mind really has a purpose without the body.

Taking into account what we have read about our knowledge of the world around us, can you say that you know the world around you?

ABSTRACT: Cartesian dualism and the union of mind and body are often understood as conceptions that contradict each other. Diachronic interpretations maintain that Descartes was first a dualist (in the Meditations) and later on developed his stance on the union of mind and body (Passions). Some authors find here a problem without solution. Nevertheless, in the last two decades, some interpretations have been developed intending to give a positive solution to the difficult relation between Cartesian dualism and the union of mind and body. The problem that I find in most of them is that they try to show no incoherence between Descartes' dualism and his conception of the union and

the "discourse on the method" by Descartes is different from Marlowe's "doctor Faustus" because Descartes actually believes in God and does not do anything to offend him unlike the character in the "doctor Faustus" who sold his soul to the devil. another way would be is that the character from the "doctor Faustus" plays cruel jokes and uses satire to make fun of people unlike the "discourse on method" Descartes book is very different from Marlowe's in that way but another way they are the same is that Descartes is trying to improve the way we think just like Marlowe. of course on is less aggressive than the

In his Meditations on First Philosophy, Descartes strives first and foremost to provide an infallibly justified foundation for the empirical sciences, and second to prove the existence of God. I will focus on the first and second meditations in my attempt to show that, in his skepticism of the sources of knowledge, he fails to follow the rules he has set out in the Discourse on Method. First I claim that Descartes fails to draw the distinction between pure sensation and inference, which make up what he calls sensation, and then consider the consequences of this failure to follow his method. Second, I will show that in his treatment of thinking Descartes fails to distinguish between active and passive thinking.

With the emergence of the scientific revolution in the 17th century, views of society and nature were transformed throughout Europe. There were great developments in mathematics, physics, astronomy, biology, and chemistry. The world and its views were changing, and with that change, came a new change in thought, a new change in philosophy. Apart from ancient Greek philosophy, which was centered on finding order in a vast variety of things by searching for a fundamental amalgamating principle, Descartes sought to establish order via some fundamental division. Descartes understands and expresses that what we know about our mind is more definite than what we know about the world outside our mind. Descartes’

Renee Descartes, as a Rationalist viewed knowledge as something that we achieve through reason. Descartes begins his theory of knowledge by assuming that nothing exists. By doing this he would have to trust nothing. Not his senses, not anything that he has thought. As a Rationalist he sought to eliminate all doubt and anything else that wasn 't completely credible. Because he found that his senses were not one hundred percent reliable, as he found they sometimes deceived him, he did not trust them. Descartes believed that in order to obtain knowledge, there must be a rational method for obtaining it, and that the use of the senses, or any personal experience was not a reliable source. Finally, in Meditations on First Philosophy he concludes that he is a thinking thing: “I think, therefore I am”. He knows that this is true because he thinks, and to disprove that would require thinking and since he

While numerous philosophers have debated how to quantify personal identity, It is my contention that Rene Descartes presents the best argument .This essay will examine the strengths and weaknesses within his theory. This essay will also also compare Descartes argument to Rick Parfit and David Humes individual interpretations of what personal identity is. Lastly, this essay will examine the weaknesses within Descartes argument and the points some have contention with.