Rationality of Belief in an External World

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 )

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

The main in Descartes Meditations 1 and 2 is that the method of gaining knowledge just through the senses is wrong, Descartes advocates for the method of gaining knowledge through the existing mind or intellect not through senses alone. He backs up his first argument reflecting on his life and how he believed things because of his senses. He then gives then gives the example of his dreams in which his senses tell him some things are true, in turn he believes them. In the second meditation he backs up his argument by stating the disconnection we as humans have from the mind and the world. He gives the example of the wax explaining we can’t gain knowledge about the wax based of just senses but it requires us to also use intellect.

     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.

In the First Meditation, Descartes invites us to think skeptically. He entices us with familiar occasions of error, such as how the size of a distant tower can be mistaken. Next, an even more profound reflection on how dreams and reality are indistinguishable provides suitable justification to abandon all that he previously perceived as being truth. (18, 19) By discarding all familiarity and assumptions, Descartes hopes to eliminate all possible errors in locating new foundations of knowledge. An inescapable consequence of doubting senses and prior beliefs

He wishes to correct these wrong opinions, so he begins to reconstruct their foundations in order to build up correct knowledge. He reconstructs their foundations so he does not have to go back and fix every single wrong belief he has. His method for reconstructing the foundation involves bringing these foundations into doubt. Three forms of which to doubt the foundations of his opinions are sense doubt, dream doubt, and defective nature doubt. The first form of doubt it sense doubt. Descartes states that everything we know and have learned has been through our senses. The senses have demonstrated their ability to deceive us, particularly in regards to objects that are far away. An example is that we know that the sun is a massive entity in space, but our senses tell us that it is a small object in the sky [Meditations]. Individuals who suffer from phantom leg syndrome are another example. Although the limb or appendage has been removed, the individual often still experiences sensation where the limb or appendage used to be (3). Therefore, we cannot always trust our senses. However, the senses have proven right about things that cannot be doubted, such as math. The second type of doubt is dream doubt. Descartes finds that the content of his dreams is often indistinguishable from a conscious experience. When dreams like these occur, there

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

He finds it plausible that we are all living in a dream and we have never experienced reality. He can no longer give any credence to his senses and finds himself in a place of complete uncertainty. Descartes comes to the conclusion that nothing can be perceived more easily and more evidently than his own mind. He has discovered that even bodies are not accurately perceived by the senses or the faculty of imagination, and are only accurately being perceived by the intellect. He also realizes that they are not distinguished through being touched, smelled, or tasted, but by being understood alone. (An apple is an apple because our mind tells us that it is an apple.) It is the faculty of reason that gives the knowledge and lets the mind know the truths and essences of objects. Descartes assumes that all of us can be decided by our senses, someone can see something far away, and then discover that is not what we thought it was. Or even a oar when is immerse half in water attempt to be bent, but instead is straight. Descartes think that we cannot always be sure of what we sense, and gives the example of himself seated by the fire.

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.

This paper will attempt to explain Descartes’ first argument for the distinction that exists between mind and body. Dualism is a necessary aspect of Descartes’ metaphysics and epistemology. This distinction is important within the larger framework of Meditations on First Philosophy (1641) because after doubting everything (body, extension, senses, etc.), Descartes comes to the conclusion that because he doubts, he must be a thinking thing and therefore exist (p.43). This means that the mind must be separate and independent from the body. One can doubt that the body exists while leaving the mind intact. To doubt that the mind exists, however, is contradictory. For if the mind does not exist, how, or with what, is that doubt being accomplished.

Before these changes were apparent, Descartes pointed out the difficulties of relying on the senses, of the physical body. In section 31 of Meditation two, he says that the perception he has, "is a case not of vision or touch or imagination - nor has it ever been, despite previous appearances - but of purely mental scrutiny". Descartes shows that our senses cannot be used to have knowledge of things in the external world, and that knowledge of these things must come through the mind alone.

Once Descartes established himself as a "thinking thing", his attention turns to the external world. Descartes reflects upon his dealing with physical objects, and questions the state of physical nature, dealing directly with the senses. Restating the fact that Descartes believes that these sensations of taste, touch, smell, and the like can be fooled, he attacks these bodily perceptions, not from the point of "what makes them true", but rather "what makes them false". These senses lead him to ideas of external objects, which he claims to perceive clearly and distinctly, yet he is not

Descartes’s theory of knowledge is essentially based in skepticism. He argued that in order to understand the world, first a person has to completely suspend their judgements of the world around them. This is the impression that the world makes on their mind. In this way, the physical world is not what leads to knowledge. Instead, the mind finds rationally seeks knowledge. The question is, essentially, “should we believe beyond the evidence?” (Kessler, 2013, p. 332). In this way, the ideas are rooted in the nature of doubt. This is an inherent nature of the mind, which is the result of the nature of man as made by God. In this way, the mind is guided by god towards knowledge in its infallible ability to reason about reality. In this way, the mind’s reasoning ability, even in the absence of physical reality, can ultimately lead to knowledge. I don’t fully agree with Descartes’ proposition that only the mind can produce certain knowledge and that our senses are constantly under the attack and being deceive by some evil deceiver. In order to go against Descartes propositions concerning about doubt I will use Locke to oppose it.

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

Firstly, Descartes deals with the issue of empiricism- the theory that our knowledge is derived from our sensory experiences. Since we know from everyday errors that our senses have the ability to deceive us fairly often so making our perceptions to be something that it is not. For example, there are lots of examples of optical illusions and the fact that the train tracks may appear to converge from a distance. Consequently, we ought to