The Rationalists: Descartes God and Error

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

2. Outline Meditation 4 : Theory of error Meditation 5: Existence of God – Ontological Argument Cartesian Circle Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

3. The third meditation provides us with: 1. A general rule for finding actual truth : clear and distinct intuitions Meditation 3 – Reminder 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

4. Summing up: Doubt: all knowledge is doubtful but the Cogito The Cogito gives also a method to reach the truth: clear and distinct perceptions of the mind – truth of an instant Non deceiving God = guarantees the persistence of truth Meditation 4: Introduction God not a deceiver: rather easy: • P1: God = all perfect • P2: Deception = imperfection • CC: God ≠ deceiver The problem: How can we consistently hold that: God is the truthful source of my innate ideas I can make mistakes Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

5. Meditation 4: Theory of error Scholastic Arguments Error as a mere defect: 1. The view: errors come from a defect: perfect knowledge is not of my nature (just as wings are not either) 2. Descartes’ distinction: defect vs. privation Defect: wings Privation: jamming wings If God is perfect, any faculty that he gave me, including the faculty of knowledge, should be perfect as well Other arguments rejected: 1. incomprehension 2. big picture Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

6. Two perfect faculties Meditation 4: Theory of error 1. Intellect (or understanding): limited but no errors 2. Will: infinite – the most perfect of our faculties – what makes us similar to God Mechanics of Error: We make mistakes whenever we use our will to affirm or deny outside of the bounds of our understanding – i.e when we are indifferent Both faculties are perfect. God not responsible. Error comes from us misusing perfect faculties. Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

7. Meditation 4: Freedom and Indifference (If we have time) “Were I always to see clearly what is true and good, I would never deliberate about what is to be judged or chosen. In that event, although I would be entirely free, I could never be indifferent.” Two conflicting notions of freedom 1. Indifference – negative 2. Autonomy – positive One possible distinction: two notions of indifference: mere indifference and absolute free will Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

8. Meditation 4: Conclusion Theory of Error: Misuse of Will outside of the limits of our understanding Theory of Truth: Use our will within the limits of our understanding! Notice the importance of attention – this is the power of the will again ! Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana