1 / 21

The Rationalists: Descartes Certainty: Self and God

Explore Descartes' pursuit of certainty in self and God through the Cogito and the nature of the mind versus body. Analyze the wax analogy and the proof of God's existence. Delve into the philosophical realm of clear and distinct ideas.

hernandezdennis
Download Presentation

The Rationalists: Descartes Certainty: Self and God

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The Rationalists: Descartes Certainty: Self and God Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

  2. Meditation 2: • The Cogito • I am a thinking thing • The piece of Wax • Conclusion Outline Meditation 3: • A general rule for truth: clear and distinct ideas • The existence of God (Proof 1) Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

  3. Summing up: Doubt: Radical, Hyperbolic, Methodological No source of knowledge passed the test : senses – dream argument, reason – evil genius Doubtful hence considered as false: External world, personal body, rational truths Meditation 2: Introduction Meditation 2: Look at the title!! “Concerning the Nature of the Human Mind: That it is Better Known than the Body” Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

  4. Prospect for research: Certainty in any case One single certainty would be enough: Archimedes Meditation 2 – The Cogito The Cogito: 1. Resists the Evil Genius Argument 2. Problems with interpretation: - Inference or limit of the doubt - genuine intellectual and subjective experience The Cogito is a Subjective Truth Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

  5. Question of Method: How am I to figure out what I am? Meditation 2 – I am a thinking thing 1. Against Definitions 2. The method of Doubt is universal – apply it here ! What did I used to think I am: 1. An well known body 2. Equipped with an incomprehensible soul • This is the scholastic view! • How does it face the doubt? Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

  6. What am I? Meditation 2 – I am a thinking thing 1. Not my body 2. A thinking thing ! Problem of interpretation: Thing = substance? What is a thinking thing? Broad definition: any mental activity (anything not body like), including sensations ! • Descartes’ paradox: Subjectivity is the road to truth! Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

  7. The point of the passage: Look at the conclusion!! Meditation 2 – The piece of wax But I need to realize that the perception of the wax is neither a seeing, nor a touching, nor an imagining. Nor has it ever been, even though it previously seem so; rather it is an inspection on the part of the mind alone [...]. (33) • So: the point of the passage: We know things through the understanding, not through our senses and imagination • Descartes is making an epistemological point Problem: how is this relevant to the claim that we know our mind better than our body? Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

  8. Argument: P1: The piece of wax can change; P2: But what we call the piece of wax is still the same; CC1: there is something I know of the wax which remains the same when the piece of wax undergoes changes; Unstated Premise: only unchanging aspects of something constitute what I know truly of it; P3: the sensitive qualities do not remain CC2: the sensitive qualities are not what the piece of wax as I truly know it; P4: what remains is that it is extended, flexible and mutable; CC3: Instead, I truly know as the piece of wax truly as: extended, flexible and mutable Meditation 2 – The piece of wax Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

  9. With which faculty do I know the piece of wax? Meditation 2 – The piece of wax • - Not the senses • - Not the imagination • - Perception of the mind Generalization: • Any sensation in fact relies on a judgment of understanding • Example: hats in the street • We know everything through the understanding Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

  10. Do I know my mind better than my body? Meditation 2 – The piece of wax • - It does not seem to follow: distinction faculty / object: • I know better with my mind ≠ I know my mind better • - Possible hidden premise: • I know better what is distinct – i.e. of an unmixed nature • Descartes has not shown his main claim Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

  11. The Cogito: One single certainty as a subjective evidence Meditation 2 – Conclusion Problem with the Cogito: thinking thing and substance The piece of wax: our mind takes part in the entirety of knowledge, even the perception of sensible particulars Problem with the piece of wax: we haven’t shown that we know our mind better than our body, unless further assumptions are made. Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

  12. Meditation 2: • The Cogito • I am a thinking thing • The piece of Wax • Conclusion Outline Meditation 3: • A general rule for truth: clear and distinct ideas • The existence of God (Proof 1) Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

  13. Meditation 3: Introduction Summing up: One single certainty Importance of the Mind Meditation 3: Look at the title: “Concerning God; That He Exists” Why proving the existence of God???? Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

  14. General rule: Everything that I very clearly and very distinctly perceive is true Meditation 3 – Clear and Distinct Ideas Argument • I am certain that I am a thinking thing • There is nothing that assures of this proposition is true except a clear and distinct perception of it • Hence, I can be certain of everything that I perceive in the same way, that is, clearly and distinctively • Truth does not take anything more than • a clear and distinct idea Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

  15. Meditation 3 – Why do we need God? Clear and Distinct ideas: 1. Certain at the moment of the intuition 2. Doubtful when attention turned to Evil Genius • Clear and Distinct Intuition = criterion of actual truth • We need a truthful God for eternal truths • Descartes will try to prove: (1) That God exists and (2) That He is truthful Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

  16. Meditation 3 – That God Exists Descartes discusses the origin of our Ideas: Why? 1. we are stuck in our minds 2. what if we had an idea which requires that something else exist? • This idea is going to be the idea of God Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

  17. Meditation 3 – That God Exists First round: Do my ideas correspond to external things? 1. Three kinds of ideas: innate, adventitious, fictitious 2. What do I used to believe that adventitious ideas come from external things? a. Nature taught me? natural impulses = truth? b. Independent of my will? Another faculty than will? c. Resemblance with external objects? Sun!? • Dead end! We are still stuck… Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

  18. Second round: The argument from the objective reality of ideas Meditation 3 – That God Exists 1. Three kinds of reality for ideas: a. Material reality – all ideas are equally made of thought b. Formal reality – ideas all differ in terms of what they represent c. Objective reality – ideas differ in terms of the degree of reality of their object Idea of God: greatest objective reality • Be careful: • Objective reality of the idea ≠ Reality of the object Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

  19. Second round: The argument from the objective reality of ideas Meditation 3 – That God Exists (1. Three kinds of reality for ideas) 2. I cannot be the cause of the idea of God a. Causal Principle – appeal to natural light b. Two kinds of object for my ideas: (1) composite, (2) corporeal substances, (3) God c. I can be the cause of (1) and (2) c. I cannot be the cause of (3) • I cannot be the cause of my idea of the actual infinite Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

  20. Third round: God as the cause of my existence Descartes’ cosmological argument Meditation 3 – That God Exists 1. Candidates: (1) Myself, (2) my parents or anything less than God, (3) God 2. Hyp (1): No, or else I could not conceive of my imperfections 3. Objection: what if I have always exited? No, because persistence in time is as demanding as creation (!) 4. Hyp (2): No, for otherwise infinite regress • God is the first cause which causes itself Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

  21. The third meditation provides us with: 1. A general rule for finding actual truth : clear and distinct intuitions Meditation 3 – Conclusion 2. Proofs that God exists, in order to secure the persistence of the truth of clear and distinct intuitions: (1) From the objective reality of the idea of the infinite (2) As the first non contingent cause of contingent existence • God appears in this meditation as the “mark of the craftsman impressed upon his work” • If God can be shown not to be a deceiver, then we’re good for rational truths! Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

More Related