First Meditation – paragraph 1

1. First Meditation – paragraph 1 • What problem troubles Descartes? • falsehoods from childhood, doubtful edifice based on them • What is his ultimate goal? • establishing something stable and lasting in science, finding something certain • What is his method for achieving this goal? • demolishing every opinion

2. ¶2 – Clarifying the method • How to demolish all my opinions • Do I have to show that they are false? No. • I just have to find some reason for doubt (i.e., show that they are less than certain) • Do I have to examine and reject every single opinion? No. • I just have to examine and reject the foundational opinions (and then all the others will ‘collapse’). • Apparently, rejecting an opinion is merely withholding assent from it. • He’s not rejecting this opinion as a falsehood, he’s just not going to accept it as true.

3. ¶3 – Sense-based opinions • Take the opinions I am most confident about—how did I get these opinions? • From the senses (eyes, ears, . . . ) • But should I completely trust my senses? • No, because they can deceive us (at least occasionally).

4. ¶4 – Indubitable beliefs? • But wait a second! • Sure, our senses can deceive us about things far away or in poor light. • But some of my sense-based beliefs cannot be doubted. • ordinary beliefs concerning my immediate surroundings or my own body • Or at least the only way to doubt them is to model myself on insane people. • And modeling oneself on the insane is itself insane. • I mean, right??

5. ¶5 – Dreaming • Ah, but when I’m asleep, I have experiences just like the experiences of insane people (and sometimes even crazier). • Sometimes these experiences deceive me about my immediate surroundings. • I think I’m awake in front of the fire, but really I’m asleep and dreaming. • [So, even with beliefs about my surroundings, perhaps there is some reason for doubt]

6. ¶5 – Dreaming • But right now, aren’t there some sure signs that I’m awake? • wide-open eyes, head feels awake, deliberate movement, clarity • No, because such thoughts have deceived me before. • There are no sure signs for settling whether I am awake or dreaming.

7. ¶6 – Dreams and paintings • But even if I am dreaming, still the contents of my dream must be based on things that are real. • Just like how a painting of something unreal must be based on real things. • Or even if the dream is extremely alien and exotic, still it must at least be made up of materials found in reality. • Just like how any painting, no matter how alien and exotic, must at least make use of colors. • So even if I am dreaming, still there must be some simple and universal things that are real.

8. ¶7 – Simple and universal things • Things like: • corporeal nature and its extension (matter and the way it takes up space) • shape of extended things • quantity, size, number of extended things • space • time • These are the most basic elements of the world; everything is made out of them; and even if I am dreaming, still these things must be real.

9. ¶8 – Science and mathematics • So the dream argument undermines science, but leaves math safe. • Studies of composite things are doubtful. • Physics, astronomy, medicine, . . . • But studies of simple things might still be safe. • Geometry, arithmetic, . . . • Whether or not I am dreaming, still 2 + 3 = 5 and squares have four sides.

10. ¶9 - God • But I believe that God made me the way I am. • So perhaps I am deceived about shape, size, place, and the like, because of the way God made me. • And perhaps I go wrong even when I try to do simple mathematics, because of the way God made me. • Maybe I’m deceived even about these simple and universal things!

11. ¶9 - God • Objection: But if God is good, how could he allow me to be so radically deceived? • Response: • I already think that, even though God exists, still I am deceived at least occasionally. • And since it’s consistent with God’s goodness to allow me to be occasionally deceived, it must be consistent with God’s goodness to allow me to be radically deceived.

12. ¶10 – Atheism? • Perhaps there is no God. • But if so, then the original cause of my existence would be something like fate or chance or a long causal chain. • So my original cause would be less powerful. • Which makes it more likely that I am flawed, and prone to deception and error. • So now it’s even more likely that I’m deceived all the time.

13. ¶10 – Universal doubt • So, for each of my beliefs, there is a legitimate basis for doubt. • This includes beliefs about my immediate surroundings, about my own body, about basic elements of reality, and even about mathematics! • I want to discover certainty. • So I must try to withhold assent from each of my former beliefs.

14. ¶11 - Habit • But it’s so difficult to stop believing them! • Old habits die hard. Effort is needed. • Even though I recognize that they’re not completely certain, I still think they’re probable. • So I’ll have to pretend that they are false. • This goes further than mere withdrawal. • This will keep old habits from interfering with my intellectual project.

15. ¶12 – Evil demon • So I’ll suppose that an all-powerful evil demon is trying to deceive me about everything. • Everything I experience is an illusion. • And I will refuse to believe the illusions the demon is creating. • Though I can’t know any truth, I can at least avoid falsehood. • This is very difficult to maintain. It’s easy to slide back into my old opinions, my familiar illusions, instead of facing up to the intellectual problems I’ve raised.

16. Questions • When Descartes doubts all his beliefs, what exactly is his attitude towards them? • What is the Deceptive Senses argument supposed to show? • What is the Dream argument supposed to show? • What is the point of the ‘dreams and paintings’ analogy? • What is the God argument supposed to show? • Why does Descartes introduce the evil demon scenario?

17. Tougher questions • If we can’t be certain about math, then presumably we can’t be certain about logic. But then how can Descartes reason his way out? • When Descartes pretends that his former beliefs are false, is he accepting their negation? If so, doesn’t that contradict his method of rejecting all uncertain beliefs? • Why doesn’t the Dream argument raise doubts for math?