Part of The Student Room Group

  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Descartes' classification of thoughts.

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Descartes From the Second Meditation, Descartes knows that the mind, as well as the body, is known, neither by means of the senses nor the imagination but rather by the understanding, an inspection of the mind and its contents. In the Third Meditation, Descartes reviews the contents of his mind, namely, ideas, which are modes of thought, which exist, only in a thinking mind. Descartes reminds himself that he is certain that he is a thing that thinks, but asks whence comes this certainty. It lies, he argues, in the clear and distinct perception of what he affirms. Therefore, as a general principle (Descartes' rule of evidence), whatever is clearly and distinctly perceived must be true, as long as God exists and is not a deceiver. However, although it seems that the cogito (thinking) and 2+3=5 are true insofar as they are both clearly and distinctly perceived, if there is an evil genius deceiving Descartes, he cannot be assured of the truth of his rule of evidence. Therefore, in this essay I am going to show how Descartes proves 1) that there is a God and 2) whether or not God can be a deceiver, in order to demonstrate that nothing, which is both clearly and distinctly perceived, could ever be false and that the best evidence Descartes can have for the truth of anything is that he clearly and distinctly perceives it. ...read more.

Middle

According to Descartes, a cause can only give to the effect as much reality as the cause itself; "there must be at least as much reality in the efficient and total cause as there is in the effect" (28). Hence, nothing can come from nothing. For instance, a stone can be made by chipping off a larger piece of rock, since the larger rock has more (or just as much) reality, but a stone cannot be made out of a colour, since a stone has more reality than a colour. Descartes also suggests that an idea can only be caused by something that ahs as much formal reality as the idea has objective reality. A stone or a large rock, then, could cause the idea of a stone, but it could not be caused by colour. Therefore, Descartes grants that ideas can be caused by other ideas, but that there must ultimately be something more than an idea that is the cause of these ideas. The first cause of an idea must be something with at least as much formal reality as the idea has objective reality. If he can conceive of some idea with so much objective reality than it must come from some cause with more formal reality than he himself possesses, Descartes reasons that he will then know that something outside his mind exists to create this idea. ...read more.

Conclusion

We can trace this chain back through countless creators, but we must ultimately conclude that the idea of God can originate only in God, and not in some finite being. Therefore 5) God must be the cause of Descartes. Having concluded that God must necessarily exist, Descartes asks how he received the idea of God. The idea cannot be adventitious, coming from without, nor can Descartes have invented it. Thus, the idea must be innate, and God must have created Descartes with this idea already in him. Therefore, the whole force of the argument lies on the fact that he recognized that it would be impossible for him to exist, being of such nature as he is, namely, having in him the idea of God, unless God did in fact exist. He clearly and distinctly perceives that God is no deceiver, since all deception relies on some defect or other, and a perfect God has no defects. Descartes has eliminated both himself and the outside world as possible causes of his idea of God, Therefore this proof of God relies on casual reasoning, suggesting that there must be a cause of the idea of God that is as great as God Himself. Though my idea of God might have come from my grandparents, and their idea came from the minister, the suggestion is that at the end of that casual chain, there is a first cause, which is God. ?? ?? ?? ?? 1 ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our University Degree Philosophy and Theology section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

or


Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related University Degree Philosophy and Theology essays

  1. Rene Descartes' Mind and Body.

    Second, minds exist in human beings. Let's assume all human beings are without minds instead only the physical brains direct our actions. In a physical sense, humans store information taken from outside and put into their brains. Here is a problem then, how can one explain a person making a decision not for the benefit of

  2. Are there any innate ideas?

    Leibniz, however, believed that the soul inherently contains the sources of various notions and doctrines. When it comes to the senses, contrary to general rationalist theory, Leibniz does not disregard them, as many rationalists seem to do, instead he maintains that truths of fact depend on observational experience and even

  1. Assess Descartes Trademark Argument

    Fictitious ideas are those made up, like unicorns. The ideas he gets from outside are questionable however, and he takes note of this. The only way he can be sure that what he perceives representing what is really there is by the "natural light of reason". When something is revealed through this a shadow of doubt cannot be cast.

  2. Paradox of the Stone

    He justified himself by saying that if people believed 'God` wasn't able to do the impossible, i.e. Be omnipotent (using his own definition) then they were denying the very existence of their 'God`. Despite being religious himself Thomas Aquinas was one of the many people who didn't believe Descartes interpretation of the word omnipotence.

  1. Oranges are not the only fruit compared with Empire of the Sun

    The central characters in each novel share other similarities; again, they are connected with childhood. Jim is very impressionable, as is Jeanette. At first Jim is impressed with the Japanese planes and their technology; but when he sees the Americans bombing the Japanese airbase his opinion sways.

  2. Rene Descartes

    So, at least according to Descartes, it is reasonable to doubt everything our senses tell us, for the time being. Now, using similar logic, we can say that everything we have learned from physics, astronomy, medicine, and other such fields are all doubtful.

  1. The arguments Descartes uses to demonstrate the existence of God

    Descartes then asked what the cause of this idea could be, concluding that it must lay beyond the world of his own ideas, to have pre-existed in his mind. The only thing powerful enough to exist beyond this realm, and be a cause unto itself, must be this 'first idea' and what it represents.

  2. Does Descartes give any good reason for saying that his mind could exist without ...

    This is clearly questioning whether because we may not know the properties of the mind, or possibly have a misconception of these properties, does that mean that the mind does not necessarily possess the properties? A supporting argument came from Antoine Arnauld who used the example of the triangle: he

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work