Descartes's Argument Analysis

In this paper, I will discuss the “Divisibility argument” on Descartes mind- body dualism presented on Descartes meditations. I will claim that the mind and the body are in fact different as Descartes argument suggests, but I will more rather neglect and explain why his belief that the mind is indivisible is wrong. I also will discuss how Descartes argument on the body’s divisibility is reasonable, and the reasons why I believe this argument is true.

One may first look at the argument contained within Descartes’ book Meditations on First Philosophy. In the sixth meditation Descartes states “On the one hand I have a clear and distinct idea of myself, in so far as I am simply a thinking, non-extended thing and on the other hand I have a distinct idea of body, in so far as this is simply an extended, non-thinking thing. And accordingly, it is certain that I am really distinct from my body, and can

In his Meditations on First Philosophy, Descartes states “I have a clear and distinct idea of myself, in as far as I am only a thinking and unextended thing, and as, on the other hand, I possess a distinct idea of body, in as far as it is only an extended and unthinking thing”. [1] The concept that the mind is an intangible, thinking entity while the body is a tangible entity not capable of thought is known as Cartesian Dualism. The purpose of this essay is to examine how Descartes tries to prove that the mind or soul is, in its essential nature, entirely distinct from the

Descartes concludes from his first meditation that he is a thinking thing, and as long as he thinks, he exists. In the second meditation, Descartes attempts to define what the “thinking thing” that he concluded himself to be in the first meditation actually was. Descartes’ determines that he gains knowledge of the world, that is, knowledge that is separate from the mind, through the senses; and that the senses can deceive. This he outlines within the first meditation, and mentions on the second meditation. Furthermore, in the second meditation, Descartes refuses to define himself as a rational animal, instead going back and relying on labeling him mind as a thinking thing. In the fifth and sixth paragraphs of the second meditation, Descartes distinguishes the body from the soul. Descartes indicates that there is the presence of the body, and it seems to be in the physical world, but he also notes that his mind does not seem to exist in the same manner. Descartes also claims that the ability to perceive is a power of the soul, but inoperable without the body. Descartes then explores another object with physical substance, which is a piece of wax. The piece of wax is undeniably physical; it takes up space within the material world. The body falls into the category, just as any other physical object in the material world. The main point of Descartes’ second meditation is that any given person can know more about their mind than of the world surrounding them.

In the Sixth Meditation, Descartes makes a point that there is a distinction between mind and body. It is in Meditation Two when Descartes believes he has shown the mind to be better known than the body. In Meditation Six, however, he goes on to claim that, as he knows his mind and knows clearly and distinctly that its essence consists purely of thought. Also, that bodies' essences consist purely of extension, and that he can conceive of his mind and body as existing separately. By the power of God, anything that can be clearly and distinctly conceived of as existing separately from something else can be created as existing separately. However, Descartes claims that the mind and body have been created separated without good reason. This

Topic: How does Descartes argue that mind and body are distinct? Is he right? Am I real, or imaginary? In the First Meditation, Rene Descartes presents the main falsehoods in which he believed during his life, and the subsequent faultiness he experienced concerning the body of knowledge. The philosopher considers that it is never too late to rethink the knowledge about his personal being from the very foundations, and builds his thoughts on a certain ground starting from common things. It would be impossible to doubt each thing separately, so he expresses his doubt to the basic principles of knowledge he has already gained, since a conclusion would surely be doubted if its premise was doubted. He starts by doubting basic senses, by comparing feels in reality vs. in dreams. For example, even if I consciously feel warm when I am walking in the sun, I could not claim that I am hundred-­‐percentage sure I am awake, since I would feel it the same way when I was in dreams. Descartes presents this idea to show the doubt of reality and its elements. Also, he concludes that the common things we perceive are fashioned, and knowledge based on that can be doubted, such as physics and astronomy. This category of knowledge are different from geometry and arithmetic, which contain certain and definiteness in the simplest thing. By doubting the sense and knowledge based on it, Descartes argued his approach that the body and mind are two absolutely distinctive things. Descartes mentions God

In Descartes Meditations on First Philosophy, he introduces the divisibility argument for his idea of mind-body dualism. It argues that the mind is distinct from the body and that they are different "substances". The argument has two premises; the mind is indivisible and the body is divisible. In this essay, I will interpret Descartes' argument by discussing the key points of these premises and how they are supported. I will also be incorporating my own thoughts on the argument to determine whether the divisibility argument is enough to validate the idea of mind-body dualism.

In Meditation six: Concerning the Existence of Material Things, and the Real Distinction between Mind and Body, Rene Descartes wrote of his distinctions between the mind and the body, first by reviewing all things that he believed to be true, then assessing the causes and later calling them into doubt, and then finally by considering what he must now believe. By analyzing Descartes’ writing, this paper will explicate Descartes’ view on bodies and animals, and if animals have minds. Before explicating the answer to those questions, Descartes’ distinctions between the mind and the body should first be summarized and explained.

In this essay I will be exploring the argument put forward by Descartes whereby he can conclude that there is an external world. I will be looking into his ideas to do with the difference between imagination and intellect and breaking the main points he puts forward in explanation of the existence of the external world that surrounds us. I will then look into multiple objections to Descartes ideas and show why I believe Descartes argument stands up against criticism.

The argument Descartes makes about the existence of corporeal objects because they were created by a good-natured God fails. The sixth meditation deals with the proof of the physical world and corporeal objects and the real distinction between the mind and the body. Descartes says that if one can conceive of something without contradiction, then that thing is possible because it is possible for God to make that thing happen. A clear weak-link in the argument is that firstly, how does Descartes know that God is real? Moreover, how does Descartes know whether God is good? Using ontology, Descartes defends God’s existence due to his nature. Descartes believes that God is a supreme being that holds perfection. He assumes that his existence is

Write a three to four (3-4) paragraph essay (250 words) which analyzes the "surprise ending" of the reading selection.? Reading selection from Descartes' Discourse on the Method (Part IV). Descartes begins with the problem of being able to prove his own existence but ends up with an argument proving the existence of God. Read more about the Discourse on the Method located at HYPERLINK "http://www.earlymoderntexts.com/pdf/descdisc.pdf" http://www.earlymoderntexts.com/pdf/descdisc.pdf.

In defense of Descartes, the “Meditations on First Philosophy” attempts to explain what else, besides a thinking thing, that I am. However, this section, in the Second Meditation, is only attempting to explain “What else am I?”1 ex post facto the conclusion that I am “a thinking thing.”2 Consequently, this returns us to the perspectives of certainty problem that was part of the “linguistic convenience” argument. In essence, Descartes has not proved anything with precise certainty.

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

The argument that caught my interest was on page 32 of the Meditations On First Philosophy. In there Descartes argues about the nature of one’s knowledge as being finite. He says that anything which is infinite is incapable of a greater increase. Following, he says that his knowledge is something that is capable of constant greater increase. With respect to Descartes’s definition of the infinite, it is then clear when he says that his knowledge can never be infinite.

for pure reason so that to claim what exists surpassing both ideas and the thinker who has them. Thiselton states that although some criticize Descartes for arguing that God is an obvious, different and beyond doubt as God himself has put within the brain, “God is infinite, external, immutable, all powerful, by which I myself and everything else have been created. There is nothing that I should know more easily than God, except for human prejudice.” Therefore, Frederich Copleston is correct in stating that Descartes` intention is not to find out a diversity isolated of truths rather to build up a scheme of true principles that is free of presupposing due to self-evidence and indubitable so that natural link between all the parts of the system, and the whole construction would place on a firm basis. This is compatible with Christianity which needs firm foundation for its belief.