Human being is complicated creature, and it is very different from any other animals in the world. What makes I become myself is a combination of all the factor about me. It includes my body, my experience, my knowledge, my thoughts, and it goes on and on. Some of these factors determine who I am while others have little effect of self. In Descartes’ Mediation, he defines himself as a “thinking thing”, which emphasizes the importance of thoughts. There are many other philosophers who have different definition of self. In my opinions, self is first a combination of body and mind; they determine the existence of me. Besides, my every experience fill me in and change me day by day.
Before I analysis the definition of “self”, I want to points out why it is important to know and understand “self”. We all live in a world which divides into two parts: self and others. We say “I think”, “I have”, “I believe” all the times. It gives us the message that “I” is the subject, and self is the window which we can look through it and see the world. In the meantime, we are the object for the world to see us, and we are the object we want to exam by ourselves. Philosophy encyclopedia says the similar idea of “Self is the agent, the knower and the ultimate locus of personal identity” (708). Self is very special because of this.
Descartes view himself as “a thinking thing”, which is “a thing that doubts, understands, conceives, affirms, denies, wills, refuses.” From his point of view, his
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
Throughout this course, we have explored both ancient and contemporary worldviews that have helped us answer the question: “What is the Self”? Apuleius had a very different approach to formulate an answer to this question then did other contemporary authors which will both be discussed in length.
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
As a thinking entity, Descartes is a consciousness mind aware of the potential to engage in various modes of existence. To the numerous operations of “thought” he includes doubting, understanding, affirming, denying, willing, refusing, imagining, and sensing. As varied and manifold as these operations appear, they are but expressions of two principal types of conscious activity, to which Descartes eventually traces the nature of error. Thinking and reasoning, together with all belief in general, depend upon the operation of the twin faculties “knowing” and “choosing,” or the free will. Garrett Thompson writes:
Something very essential to know about Descartes is his idea of Cogito Ergo Sum; I think, therefore I am. He believes that he exists because he is thinking, making him a thinking thing. Descartes first premise states, "I have a clear and distinct idea of myself, in so far as I am simply a thinking, non-extended thing" (Descartes, 54). The first thing that we need to understand from this premise is what Descartes means by extended; to occupy space. So, since he believes that he is not an extended thing, it follows that he does not take up space. Given this, he looked inside himself and saw no parts within his mind, no space or boundaries that his mind contains. In addition, the mind provides a place for free will and faith, which are not parts but different ways of thinking. He rationalizes this by making the mind of a qualitative substance. By saying that only things that can be measured must be of a material substance and those things that cannot be measured are of a thought like substance. The relation between body and mind now seem to be more divided since he believes that his mind is not extended. In short, this premise states that the mind has no parts, making it indivisible.
The next task that Descartes must consider is to define what he is, and in doing so be careful not to make assumptions. He cannot consider himself to be an animal, since that would require a definition of what an animal is. Such an examination is beyond the discussion. (25) Instead of making random guesses, Descartes begins to think about what came to mind when he considered what he was. (25, 26) The first thought that occurs to him is that he has a body - something that by definition has a determinable shape, defined location and that can occupy space. However, if an all-powerful deceiver is at work, then that which
Having assured himself that he exists and that the essential nature of his self includes at least the capacity to think he then explored the question What else am I? (Section 27) and reached this conclusion: But then what am I? A thing that thinks (res cogitans). What is that? A thing that doubts (dubitans), understands (intelligens), affirms (affirmans), denies (negans), wills (volens), refuses (nolens), and that also imagines (imaginans) and senses (sentiens) (Section 28). Descartes acknowledges that thinking includes doubt, understanding, affirmation, denial, will (volition), refusal, imagination, and senses .
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.
Two things can happen when we are required to base our definition of “self” on others. One can take others’ ways of living and thinking, process them, and formulate his or her own definition, independent of anyone else. Or, one can use the relationships he or she has with other people on which to base their own definition of self, thus making him or her dependent on those other people. As young people, we learn and take in all we can through the world, our experiences, and relationships with other people. From there, we grow and establish our own identities, our own “selves”, in response to those interactions with others. This definition is continually growing and progressing as we evolve as people, interacting with different people in different environments and
At this point Descartes notes that though he was made by God. The first thing to note is that Descartes has decided that God exists and his arguments for why God exits are explained through the use of s method called the Cartesian circle. The basis of this argument is that Descartes is a clear minded human. It it’s difficult to accept the claim that Descartes has a clear and distinct thoughts in his mind and whether he is entitled to this claim. In denying his beliefs Meditation 1, it is evident that his belief of God was never denied.
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.
Descartes concludes that the attribute of thinking is the only quality that he can justifiably claim at this point. But he is quick to point out that thinking is the only attribute about which he is sure; not that thinking is the only attribute that he has. Nevertheless, this is the starting point of a radical ontological distinction that carries Descartes through his Meditations. That distinction is between a "thinking thing" and a corporeal body. The two are mutually exclusive. A "thinking thing" is nonphysical or spiritual in nature, whereas a corporeal body is physical, but not capable of consciousness or thought. For Descartes, a "thinking thing" is consciously aware of what is around it and doubts, understands some, is ignorant of most, imagines, and feels.
When introducing the concept of self-consciousness, it can be very difficult for individuals to understand that there are many forms of self-consciousness. Many already have a definition in mind as soon as they hear the word self-consciousness. It is made up of many concepts because it isn’t just a cognitive state, rather, many cognitive states. The mind processes many things as opposed to just knowing things. Humans are capable of doing and desiring many things while self-evaluating and questioning oneself. Everyone is able to consider their own actions and to think about themselves. When thinking, humans are able to consider ideas and depictions regarding the self and others. Regarding oneself allows for evaluating self-worth in refinement to common social roles (Bermudez).
The concept of the ‘self’ is regarded as an “entity which persists through time and change” (Grayling, pg. 540), in spite of other variations, albeit unnecessary ones, that occur in a person. Ones self is alleged to be the backbone of “thinking, perceiving, memory, and the like – the ultimate ‘bearers’ of our psychological properties.” (Grayling, pg. 540) The idea of ‘self’ is a topic of important philosophical debate, and one which Kant and Hume dexterously engage themselves in. This essay will begin by outlining Hume’s philosophical approach and his theory of self. Following that Kant’s theory of self will be looked at.
The modern view of self is articulated in the works of 17th century philosopher Rene Descartes. He pioneered the dualistic understanding of the human being, which is made up of the "mental substance (mind) and the physical substance (body)" (Warburton, N., 1992). Here, the body has physical properties like having weight and using space, whereas the mind is a non-material substance, responsible for thought and experience and hence is the abode of consciousness. In his view, the self is a spiritual "subject of experience" which is fundamentally different from the body and nature, where the body inessential and the mind can exist independently. His radical scepticism led to the formation of the "Illusion argument", where the bodily senses are deemed unreliable and thus the existence of the external world and body is uncertain. The only thing one can be