Rene Descartes First Meditation

In Meditation Two of René Descartes’ Meditation on First Philosophy, he notes the sight of “men crossing the square.” This observation is important as Descartes states, “But what do I see aside from hats and clothes, which could easily hide automata? Yet I judge them to be men.” This is an important realization as Descartes argues that instead of purely noticing the men through sight, it is actually “solely with the faculty of judgement,” the mind, that perceives and concludes that the thing wearing a hat and clothes are men. I argue that this view of the outside world by Descartes is incomplete as his idea of “I” is faulty, as well as having a misunderstanding on the importance of the senses.

In Rene Descartes, Meditations on First Philosophy, Descartes does and experiment with wax to try to prove that things actually exist in this world. This essay is going to prove how we can tell that things actually exist and what can perceive the wax.

Descartes believes that knowledge comes from within the mind, a single indisputable fact to build on that can be gained through individual reflection. While seeking true knowledge, Descartes writes his Six Meditations. In these meditations, Descartes tries to develop a strong foundation, which all knowledge can be built upon. In the First Meditation, Descartes begins developing this foundation through the method of doubt. He casts doubt upon all his previous beliefs, including "matters which are not entirely certain and indubitable [and] those which appear to be manifestly false." (Descartes, p.75, par.3) Once Descartes clears away all beliefs that can be called into doubt, he can then build a strong

In the meditations, Descartes evaluates whether or not everything we know is a reality or a dream. Descartes claims that we can only be sure that our beliefs are true when we clearly and distinctively perceive them to be true. As the reader analyzes the third meditation, Descartes has confirmed that some of his beliefs are in fact true. The first is that Descartes himself exists. This is expressed in what has now become a popular quote known as the “Cogito” which says, “I think therefore I am. His second conclusion is that God exist and that he is not a deceiver. Descartes then presents his arguments to prove the existence of God. He argues that by nature humans are imperfect beings. Furthermore, humankind could not possibly be able to comprehend perfection or infinite things on their own. He writes, “By the name of God I understand a substance that is infinite, independent, all-knowing, all powerful, and which myself and everything else…have been created.”(16) Descartes uses this description of God to display the distinction between God and man.

At the beginning of Meditation three, Descartes has made substantial progress towards defeating skepticism. Using his methods of Doubt and Analysis he has systematically examined all his beliefs and set aside those which he could call into doubt until he reached three beliefs which he could not possibly doubt. First, that the evil genius seeking to deceive him could not deceive him into thinking that he did not exist when in fact he did exist. Second, that his essence is to be a thinking thing. Third, the essence of matter is to be flexible, changeable and extended.

Rene Descartes in his book Meditations on First Philosophy gives two distinct and valid arguments into the existence of God, which he explains in the Third Mediation and the Fifth Meditation. In the third meditation Descartes explains God as a substance that is eternal and extremely powerful. He calls these objective realities in which make up only a little of what God truly is. He goes onto explain that must have far more than just objective reality but formal reality as well. He knows that the concept of an everlasting and all-powerful creature couldn’t have been created in him and comes to the conclusion of something (God) being the culprit of this idea of him.

Rene Descartes decision to shatter the molds of traditional thinking is still talked about today. He is regarded as an influential abstract thinker; and some of his main ideas are still talked about by philosophers all over the world. While he wrote the "Meditations", he secluded himself from the outside world for a length of time, basically tore up his conventional thinking; and tried to come to some conclusion as to what was actually true and existing. In order to show that the sciences rest on firm foundations and that these foundations lay in the mind and not the senses, Descartes must begin by bringing into doubt all the beliefs that come to him by the senses. This is done in the first of six

In the third part of his Meditations on First Philosophy, Descartes makes an argument for mentally proving the existence of God. Having previously established the he exists and thinking thing, he then uses his method of clear and distinct perception, combined with a number of additional ideas he introduces in the chapter, to make his case. He produces an argument with some merit in its reasoning, though it is still able to be critiqued.

Descartes uses the dream experience and the idea of an evil genius to explain that our senses can deceive us. Descartes explains that there is systematic doubt meaning our sense experiences such as sight, smell, touch, taste, and hear can deceive us. However, Descartes explains how sight (vision) can deceive us, such as our dreams. Descartes goes in deeper to explain his dream theory in the First Mediation in the Meditations on First Philosophy by saying that there isn't a way for us to determine whether the experiences in our dreams from those experiences when we are awake because they are “real” that they are able to deceive us. This is because while we are dreaming, we usually are not aware that we are dreaming.

In the First Meditation, Descartes introduces the idea that everything must be placed in doubt. He argues that everything he had known to be true came to him from the senses or through the senses. However, the senses must be doubted for at any moment, he could be dreaming or his senses could be deceived either by God or some malicious demon.

In the third meditation of Descartes ' Meditation on First Philosophy, Descartes argues that his idea of God must have come from God himself. One can also wonder whether that very own argument could also apply when Descartes has an idea of the Evil Demon. In this paper, I will argue that Descartes would not think that his having an idea of the Evil Demon proves that the Evil Demon exists.

In Rene Descartes’ excerpt, Meditations on First Philosophy, he proclaims, “It is beyond question that I shall reach the truth if I think hard enough about the things that I perfectly understand, keeping them separate from all the other matters in which my thoughts are more confused and obscure” (§104). When Descartes made this statement in his fourth meditation, what was he conjecturing by the term “perfect?” According to the standard interpretation, perfect encompasses all required or desirable elements, qualities, or characteristics; as good as it is possible to be. Nevertheless, perfect has different competing interpretations. Perfect could be expressed as complete, flawless, or accurate. Hence, illuminating different denotations of Descartes’ meaning of perfect could stimulate numerous interpretations of the passage.

I will argue that John Locke approaches knowledge and truth through strong empiricism while Rene Descartes approaches knowledge and truth through weak rationalism. I will support my claim by first explaining Rene Descartes epistemology and then go on to illustrate his theory of innate ideas while using examples from Descartes Meditations on First Philosophy. Then, I will describe Locke’s epistemology that knowledge and truth are solely based on observation while humans are not born with innate ideas, and instead, according to Locke’s theory, all ideas are gained from sensation and reflection.

Descartes’ Meditations on First Philosophy (1641) contains six Meditations. In the first two of these Descartes addresses doubt and certainty. By the end of the second Meditation Descartes establishes the possibility of certainty by concluding that he is a “thinking thing” and that this is beyond doubt. Having established the possibility of certainty, Descartes attempts to prove the existence of God. The argument he presents in the Third Meditation for the existence of God has been nicknamed the ‘Trademark’ argument. This argument deals with types of ideas, of which there are three, a principle called the Causal Adequacy principle, and a sliding scale of reality. The argument concludes that the idea of a God that is a perfect being is an innate idea that is real and was caused by God and therefore God is real. This argument will be explained with the greater detail in the next paragraph. In the Fifth Meditation Descartes again addresses the existence of God with an argument for His existence. This argument is a variation of St. Anselm’s ontological argument. This argument is also framed around his theory of ideas, as well as his principle of ‘clear and distinct perception’ and is explained and discussed in paragraph three. The paragraphs following these will discuss how convincing these two arguments from Descartes are and will deal with various objections. Many of these objections are strong enough that it will be clear why Descartes’ case has failed to convince everyone.

Descartes’ first meditation, his main objective is to present three skeptical arguments to bring doubt upon what he considers his basic beliefs. Descartes believes this to be an intricate part of his complete epistemological argument. Descartes skeptical arguments are not intended to be a denial of his basic beliefs. On the contrary, he uses these arguments to help prove one of his main theses, which is the existence of God. One of the main premises that Descartes uses in his proof for the existence of God comes from the evil demon argument, which he proposed, in the first meditation. It is this evil demon argument, which will be the topic of the following discussion.