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

Does Descartes manage to defeat scepticism and leave room for human error?

Extracts from this document...


Does Descartes manage to defeat scepticism and leave room for human error? Descartes believes he has defeated scepticism by acknowledging the idea that there clearly and distinctly exists a being that is 'independent and complete'1- God. He finds it necessary to demonstrate the existence of God in order to seek knowledge of things other than the assertion 'I am thinking, therefore I am'. Descartes highlights that there is a contradiction in saying that God is a deceiver because that would imply that God is malicious. Furthermore Descartes says that within him is 'a faculty of judgement'2 of which he is certain has come from God. Thus for Descartes God would not give him a faculty that would make him capable of error. Despite these observations Descartes acknowledges that we are capable of error. The latter seems inconsistent with the previous statements. Since God is not the source of human error Descartes works on finding an alternative explanation. ...read more.


Due to its unrestricted nature the will is free to make judgment about things which we do not perceive clearly. When we make judgments about things for which we may not have a clear perception we fall into error. The will, which we misuse because we are imperfect, is the tool with which we make such judgments about perceptions of the intellect. Thus this, the will, is the cause of human error. It appears that Descartes is proposing that having the freedom of will is a good thing because it allows us to work towards truth. However this begs the question that God could have created humans as beings with the will to never go wrong - that is God could have created us as perfect beings. Descartes can deal with this by saying that 'it is the nature of a finite intellect that its scope should not extend to everything'.4 If we knew everything, that is never make an error, because we were a mirror image of God we would be robots and human life would be meaningless. ...read more.


In their eagerness to know the truth humans sometimes commit themselves to doing precisely this because they have been conditioned to. This approach is wrong according to Descartes. I can only avoid error by 'withholding judgement'6 on that which I do not clearly and distinctly perceive. However I do I know that that which the intellect can perceives in not erroneous? The answer lies in the idea that that which is God given would not be impaired because God is no deceiver. It is pointed out in the Third Set of Objections that Descartes assumes we have freedom of the will without providing us with a reason for its existence. Descartes replies that 'our freedom is very evident by the natural light'.7 Our initial reaction is that this reply is not sufficiently explanatory. 1 AT VII 53 (CSM, II, 37) 2 AT VII 54 (CSM, II, 37) 3 AT VII 57 (CSM, II, 40) 4 AT VII 18 (CSM, I, 204) 5 AT VII 60 (CSM, II, 42) 6 AT VII 62 (CSM, II, 43) 7 AT VII 191 (CSM, II, 134) ...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

Here's what a teacher thought of this essay

3 star(s)

This is a good start to an essay, which cuts off abruptly before a conclusion has been reached. The writing is lucid and quickly reaches the point. Presentation of Descartes' views is mostly accurate and some fair evaluation of these views is offered. As it stands, much of the essay doesn't really address the question. If the essay were to continue like this to present a basic conclusion as to whether, on balance, Descartes' arguments are successful, it would be deserving of a moderately good mark.

Marked by teacher David Moss 01/03/2012

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. Marked by a teacher

    Compare and contrast rationalist and empiricist approaches to human nature.

    3 star(s)

    Furthermore Descartes believed the body to be a physical biological machine being driven by animal spirit and human action is caused by reason, reflex and emotion.

  2. Marked by a teacher

    How, if at all, does the Cogito help to ground our knowledge securely?

    3 star(s)

    This, though, makes the cogito redundant. The mind is just as able to grasp the truth of "I exist" without needing to consider whether it is thinking or not. "I exist" is a self-verifying sentence: to deny it would be as absurd as to say "I am currently absent".

  1. If a tree falls in a forest and there is no one there

    Therefore, yellowness is no more a quality of a banana than painfulness is of a pin. Despite this, Boyle is confident that at least some sensible qualities of an object are directly relative to it its material qualities such as shape and size.

  2. Compare and contrast Christian and Hindu beliefs about: Life; Death; The Beyond.

    Hindus see the Atman like a drop in the ocean, Brahman is the ocean and when a drop immerses into the ocean it becomes indistinguishable. The Atman is part of the divine it is seen in a similar way to the Christian view, which is seen in the writings of

  1. In this paper, I am going to compare and contrast Hume's empiricism to Descartes' ...

    Due to the fact that we can prove things about triangles without having seen any real triangle, we clearly and distinctly understand them. If we clearly and distinctly understand triangle, the same proposition also holds if we are dealing the physical world.

  2. Waiting for Godot - Meaningless of Life

    They hope that Godot will come next day to save them, but they cannot know whether he will really come or not. (Hayman 1968: 5) Their lives seem to be decided by Godot, and they have lost their will and power to decide not to wait.

  1. Explain the criticisms that have been made about Plato's Theory of Forms.

    B) How valid are these criticisms in your view? Plato's concepts evoke fascination and admiration within me but also an element of aggravation at the arrogance with which he has exhibited his theories. I believe the abundance of these criticisms to be valid, but disagree with the criticism of there being no proof.

  2. Is knowledge justified true belief? If not, what is it?

    To avoid this, one might suggest that there must be some form of basis that we may rely on without questioning; This basis of beginning with a priori principles which we must believe to be true prior to experience is the stance taken by rationalists.

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