Descartes’ Philosophy Essay

Rene Descartes is one of the most distinct rationalists of the modern period who boldly claim that knowledge can be achieved through reason. He suggested that in the pursuit of knowledge one should be able to distinguish that which is true and that which is not true. This opens the idea towards his criticisms against experience as a source of knowledge. Experience, as Descartes puts it, cannot be trusted to produce genuine knowledge because experience can deceive a person (Heyward & Jones). It is a fact that experience comes from the external environment derived by the sensory organs (e.g. eyes, ears, nose, skin, and tongue). These sensory organs are deceptive in such a way that it can generate ideas that are not really existing or happening. Because of this fallibility of experience, Descartes argues that it cannot arrive at true knowledge. In effect, Descartes suggests that in order to obtain genuine knowledge, one should suspend his judgment on things that he or she perceives unless those things are proven to be certain and indubitable. With this method he called his pursuit of knowledge as the Methodic Doubt (Heyward & Jones). Discourse on Method In his Discourse on Method, he gives four laws which guide the person from pursuing the genuine knowledge (Heyward & Jones). The first law states that one should not admit anything as true that is not clearly and lucidly comprehended by reason. As he claims, truthfulness of an idea is based on it’s the clarity which is examined by reason. Reason tells which ideas are clear and generated by distinct intuitions. Having this law, he proceeds to the second and third laws. The second law suggests that because the mind can absorb complex ideas, these complex ideas should be able to transform to simple ideas that can be intuitively analyzed by reason. This emphasizes that simple ideas are the only ideas that reason can recognize such that complex ideas should be breakdown to simpler ideas in order for the reason to understand it clearly and distinctly. While the second law appears to be the analysis of the ideas, the third law is the synthesis of the ideas which attempts to figure out the connection and relationship among different ideas that are presented in the mind. This synthesis enables the mind to sort out ideas, and abstract them to arrive at conclusions, generalizations and judgments. The fourth and the final law suggests that the use of induction and deduction assures the achievement of knowledge since the ideas derived through induction and deduction are clearly and distinctly recognized by reason (being represented in simple ideas). Method of Doubt The discussion on the laws given above is essential in discussing Descartes’ Method of Doubt. As emphasized by the laws, ideas in order to serve as knowledge should be strongly recognized by reason in a sense that the reason cannot deny them at all. Hence, his Method of Doubt functions so as to arrive at certainty – that which cannot be doubted or denied by reason (Heyward & Jones). His method is different from the method used by the skeptics in such a way that the latter suspends their judgments only for the sake of doubt while the former suspends judgment for the achievement of certitude. As mentioned earlier, one should come up with a starting point which can be clearly recognized by reason and that which cannot be doubted. Descartes arrives at a conclusion that the thing that cannot be doubted by reason is the fact that one cannot doubt his existence. This is for the reason that if one is on the stage of doubting, it is certainly that he is thinking, and that thinking implies that there is something or someone who or which does the act of thinking. Hence, the thinking-thing exists. And that thinking-thing is, as Descartes put sit, â€Å"I.† Therefore, that which cannot be doubted is the fact that a thinking-thing exists (I think therefore I am [existing]) (Heyward & Jones). On God’s Existence As Descartes recognizes that one can be deceived by experience, such implies that there is true and false belief. This false beliefs which come into the mind as ideas are not caused by God for Descartes. For him, God is the most perfect entity that which cannot be doubted and that which cannot cause doubt. Hence, God is that which is certain and that which causes certainty that is why he cannot inflict deception (Still). The existence of simple, clear, and distinct ideas is the manifestation of the existence of the most perfect being that which is absolute and certain that is God. Therefore, God exists (He causes the most clear and distinct simple ideas which make up the certainty of things and ideas). Furthermore, Descartes advocates the idea that there are innate ideas. These innate ideas are not cause by the thinking-thing which is first established by him as that which cannot be doubted anymore. And those ideas have objective reality which is not influenced and caused by the thinking-thing; it appears then that there is actually another thing that certainly exists which caused the ideas absorbed by the thinking thing. And this thing that which exists prior to my existence is something which is absolute and the most certain of all certain things and ideas. As Descartes puts it, it is God. Another way of proving God’s existence is the idea of perfect and less perfect. As the thinking-thing is obligated to doubt so as to arrive at genuine knowledge, it implies that he is exposed to deception caused by the fallibility of the experience. And since the thinking-thing cannot discern all things with certainty it follows then that his power is limited. But the concept of perfection implies certain and absolute attributes (Still). As the thinking-thing recognizes the concept of perfection and his being an inferior and thus imperfect being, he concludes that there is something which is superior and that which is perfect, certain and absolute – that is God. Evaluation of Descartes Arguments on Knowledge Descartes is correct in saying that the mind can only and intuitively recognize simple ideas that are represented in the mind with perfect clarity and distinctiveness. He is also correct in saying that our sense perception can be deceived (e.g. optic illusions, the bending of the pen when submerged in water, etc.). And finally, he has a good point in saying that the foundation or the most fundamental thing or idea that is indubitable or cannot be doubted is the fact that the thinking-thing exists which does the doubting. However, his account on the existence of God and the innate ideas that he advocates are questionable in a way that they leave controversy and uncertainty. He equated the thing that causes the simple, clear and distinct ideas to God as well as the bearer of the attribute of being perfect. Being perfect, God is not caused by anything other than himself. But the mind is in fact the creator of such entity. If God is perfect how can be that he is not visible or perceptible to us? It is not enough to say that we are imperfect that is why we cannot perceive him. How can it happen that something which is perfect does not have a corporeal body, which the imperfect entities have? As a perfect being he should possess all the qualities that even the mere imperfect entities have. Works Cited Heyward, Jeremy and Jones, Gerald. Meditations: Rene Descartes. Hodder Murray, 2005. Still, James. â€Å"Descartes’ Meditations Ontological Argument.† 30 November 2005. Internet Infidels. 08 November 2007