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

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

Extracts from this document...


How, if at all, does the Cogito help to ground our knowledge securely? The Cogito is the name given to the famous statement Descartes considers of which he is sure of its certainty: cogito, ergo sum, or "I think, therefore I am". In the Meditations, Descartes actually uses "I think, I am", but this is practically indistinguishable from the former, which appears in Descartes' other main works. Descartes considers that the Cogito to be indubitable, and that he is able to use it to ground his knowledge securely. The Cogito, however, can be said not to be as wide or as useful as Descartes considers it to be. Its apparent indubitably may be said to be one way of securing some knowledge, but it is likely to be the case that the only knowledge which is actually secured is that contained within the Cogito itself. As the Cogito is such a simple proposition to make, Descartes himself commented that anybody could have written it. Its simplicity flows from its clear self-evidence: when one reflects on the proposition, one is thinking, and thus one can neither doubt that one is not thinking nor not existing (at least as long as the proposition is being considered). ...read more.


The use of the verb "seem", though, implies thought, thus this formation would be adding nothing new to the original form of the cogito. Again, though, one can only be sure of the fact that one is thinking and existing - nothing more can be drawn from it. Descartes is implying that the conclusion is intuitively known from the premise, thus there is just one mental act which comprehends it all. However, to say that one intuits one's knowledge of one's mental self, and then infers from this that one exists, whilst denying that one flows from the other (they are all understood immediately) seem to be contradictory. To say that by thinking, one automatically recognises one's existence is to suggest "therefore I exist" is a conclusion to the syllogism described above. The only alternative is to suggest that there is an innate knowledge of one's existence inside everyone, and that it reveals itself through mental processes: this, too, whilst providing a secure base for knowledge does not avoid inferences. Part of the way the cogito achieves this degree of surety regarding our knowledge is its reliance on the mind being transparent to the individual. Descartes' method involves the need for introspection. Markie has commented that, when one does this, one is not aware that one is thinking, but rather that there is thought. ...read more.


Descartes maintains that he can only be certain of things which he can clearly and distinctly perceive. Although he never asserts that he clearly and distinctly perceives his ability to think, and thus his existence, he says he is certain of it, which, following Descartes' method, suggests that he does clearly and distinctly perceive it. But by the Third Meditation this has been called in to doubt when he maintains that, prior to assuring oneself of the existence of God, even clear and distinct perceptions are open to manipulation by the malicious deceiver. Descartes appears to be asserting that an atheist would therefore have nothing to rest his own clear and distinct perception of his existence on, thus it would not be certain. If Descartes himself is therefore taken as a guide, until one is assured of the existence of God, even the cogito is in doubt, which means that by his own standards he has not secured knowledge of himself. Even so, the cogito still does not securely ground knowledge. As has been discussed, it merely secures a ground for knowing that the experiences one has in one's minds are in fact occurring in one's mind. Nothing more can be obtained from it, and so to claim that it is the basis of all knowledge and certainty is fallacious. [1] By which is meant the non-R.E.M, non-dreaming stages ...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 essay is to be praised for clear expression and getting to the point reasonably quickly. Most of the discussion is also reasonably well focused on the question. The discussion of Descartes' views is mostly accurate. The essay also attempts to offer a conclusion which addresses the question, which is an absolute necessity for scoring good marks. There are a couple of appropriate references to philosophical commentators though these would benefit from more development and clarity. In particular, it is not clear that the writer fully understands the views of the philosophers he cites, which are pretty much stated without discussion.

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. God Of Small Things - Significance of the title.

    They are both disabled of doing Big Things. That is why they stuck to Small Things. p.1 "The wild, overgrown garden was full of whisper and scurry of small lives" p.19 "Then Small God came away cauterized, laughing numbly at his own temerity.

  2. Waiting for Godot - Meaningless of Life

    The exclamation of waiting and meaningless can be expressed from Vladimir's saying "We are no longer alone, waiting for the night, waiting for Godot, waiting for.... waiting.(p.77) The couple has tried to escape from meaningless of life, so they sing, they keep on talking, they suggest to hang themselves, Gogo want to sleep.

  1. "Pilgrimage is just an excuse for a holiday!"

    Also, some may argue there is very limited evidence to prove that a place is authentic and untouched or may be even accurate, after all, scriptures do get lost and history is sometimes twisted. Some pilgrimages are based on a supernatural basis, for instance, Lourdes in France was founded when

  2. 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.

  1. The Problem of the Grudge Informer describes a situation that two major philosophical theories ...

    The law itself was defected. In any sort of government, the protection of its citizens is its ultimate concern. That is not to say a lawful protection always occurs. The first deputy fails to recognize that although lawful, the acts of Purple Shirtism were wrong and could diminish the duty of protection if future terrorist regimes were to take control.

  2. Compare Aristotle and Locke on private property. How are their views similar? different?

    While Aristotle admits the flaws of this system I do not feel he gives these enough merit, as private property has proven to be a main reason in the preservation of the environment. Aristotle speculates on the effects wealth, and more specifically money has on possessions.

  1. Explain how source criticism and form criticism have contributed to our understanding of the ...

    Though J did not only write down facts and legends as he had received them, he used his many devices to create his own style. He put words and speeches into the mouths of famous people and these often foreshadow what later happened.

  2. Essay on MLK's Letter from Birmingham Jail for Philosophy Class

    King references St. Thomas Aquinas by saying that "an unjust law is a human law that is not rooted in eternal law and natural law...any law that degrades human personality is unjust." Hence, segregation is unjust because it "distort[s] the soul and damages the personality...[by giving] the segregator a false sense of superiority and the segregated a false sense of inferiority."

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