Summary Of The Wax Argument

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

Descartes does not put experiences to his philosophy like the other philosophers, Bacon and Hobbes. He believes that we have some innate ideas that self, identity, substance and God are in us as we are born “most part on the truths contained in the mind”. He proposed an observations from the wax. Whatever he heats or cools the wax, it would still remain the same

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.

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.

He explained that a burning candle would go out if a candle snuffer was put over it because the air inside the snuffer became saturated with phlogiston. According to his ideas, wood is made up of phlogiston and ash,

The purpose of the wax argument is designed to provide a clear and distinct knowledge of “I”, which is the mind, while corporeal things, “whose images are framed by thought, and which the senses themselves imagine are much more distinctly known than this mysterious ‘I’ which does not fall within the imagination” (66). Through the wax argument, Descartes’ demonstrates that corporeal things are perceived neither through our senses nor imagination, but through our intellect alone. In this argument, you will see that there is cause to doubt Descartes’ analysis of the wax and his method of philosophical reasoning.

     This is where the wax argument comes into play. All the properties of the piece of wax that we perceive with the senses change as the wax melts. This is true as well of its primary properties, such as shape, extension and size. Yet the wax remains the same piece of wax as it melts. We know the wax through our mind and judgement, not through our senses or imagination. Therefore, every act of clear and distinct knowledge of corporeal matter also provides even more certain evidence for the existence of Descartes as a thinking thing. Therefore his mind is much clearer and more distinctly know to him than his body. At this

In the Meditations, Descartes abandons his views about everything he knows in the world. During this he discusses the idea of senses relying on the mind rather than the body. The role of senses is shown through his demonstration of the wax example and the ever changing properties the wax entailed. “The perception I have of it is a case not of vision or touch or imagination…but purely of mental scrutiny.” (Descartes 31) To Descartes, the senses were deceiving and could not be solely trusted in the understanding of a worldly object, in Meditation II he adequately defends this argument. Throughout this paper we will examine how this example was important to the entire argument that Descartes discusses in this paper, along with Descartes ultimate conclusion: “One cannot be deceived of their existence” and how these views may relate to other philosophers such as Locke and Berkeley.

He then tells us his final perspective on how he perceives the wax. “It remains then for me to concede that I do not grasp what this wax is through the imagination; rather, I perceive it through the mind alone.” (Descartes, 22) He ends his argument on how he perceives the wax with telling us that it is not our imagination that grasps all of the perceptions of the wax, but the mind that does it.

The reasoning behind the investigation of the wax in the second meditation is that the wax serves as an analogy of our perception on life and what we assume is truth. Descartes believed that many or even most of the truths we know could in fact be an illusion. This means that

Some have suggested that René Descartes argues that sense perception relies on the mind rather than on the body. Descartes asserts that we can know our mind more readily than we can know our body. In support of this idea he gives the example of a piece of wax which is observed in its solid form and its liquid form. After pointing out the difficulties of relying on the senses of the physical body to understand the nature of the wax he makes this claim: [P]erception ... is neither a seeing, nor a touching, nor an imagining. ... [R]ather it is an inspection on the part of the mind alone (Section 31). 1 This quote is perhaps the most direct statement of the author's thesis on this subject.

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 Descartes' wax example, he takes a piece of wax from the honeycomb in it's solid form. He observes that there are certain things, which are apparent towards the senses. The taste of the honey, its temperature (cold), the size, the colour, and when you tap it, it makes a sound. Yet, if we place the wax near heat, or a fire, the features and qualities change. No longer is the shape the same. It has become hot, and when you tap it there is no sound. This is the wax in its liquid form. So is the wax we see now, the same wax we saw before these changes?

How do we know what we know? Ideas reside in the minds of intelligent beings, but a clear perception of where these ideas come from is often the point of debate. It is with this in mind that René Descartes set forth on the daunting task to determine where clear and distinct ideas come from. A particular passage written in Meditations on First Philosophy known as the wax passage shall be examined. Descartes' thought process shall be followed, and the central point of his argument discussed.

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