Cogito Ergo Sum Arguments
René Descartes is one of the most prominent philosophical theorists and a representative of the Western rationalist trend of modern times. His concept of cogito is an introduction to philosophy with a new meaning based on reflection as an act of consciousness of the subject (Forsman 92). It does not imply a mere thinking activity, image, or desire, but the same act of discovering one’s consciousness through each of one’s experiences.
Accordingly, the interpretation of the most famous principle of cogito ergo sum is often made somewhat incorrect: the principle does not imply that anyone who thinks it exists. In the context of Descartes’ explanation, this argument points solely to the self-discovery of an object in the process of any act of consciousness (9). Thus, implied is the process of observing one’s thinking and stating that having oneself as a thinking being is the primary source of one’s acts of consciousness and their contents.
Some recursion can be observed in this concept, but the recursion confirms the basic idea of the term. According to Descartes, a thinking being is a res cogitans, that is, a thinking thing (10). Apart from this, the main argumentation of this conclusion is based on the author’s imagination of a deceptive demon who makes one question the authenticity of one’s beliefs and thoughts.
Descartes argues that a non-existent person cannot be deceived, and one must exist to be deceived (Forsman 92). In the same way, it is argued that one cannot infer one’s non-existence as long as one is convinced to the contrary. Moreover, the argument does not consider perception through one’s senses but the statement of mere existence through reflection.
The Confidence in Descartes’ Knowledge
From the basic argument of the cogito, Descartes dismantles his and any human certainty. He begins to state the basis with doubt and its opposite of certainty, further assuming the universality of this knowledge (Descartes 12). Accordingly, an inversely proportional relationship of one to the other is determined: when doubt increases, certainty decreases, and vice versa. Moreover, in reflection, it becomes clear that if there is at least a modicum of doubt about a fact, it cannot be regarded as unequivocally true or existing with complete certainty.
Thus, the only absolute certainty, not subject to even the slightest doubt, consists in the unambiguous existence of reason. Descartes lists some of his potential certainties but subjects them to his method of doubt (11). Among these, one can list the existence of one’s body, the knowledge of its birth a certain number of years ago, and its continuous existence since then. However, this knowledge confirms only the fact of the mind’s existence, and everything else is a consequence of the senses, which can be mistaken, hence causing doubt.
The Nature of the Mind Concept Understanding
The nature of the mind, as understood by the philosopher, is based on the sole certainty of its existence through thought. Descartes defines the mind as the opposite of the body, existing elsewhere without physical properties or dimensions (9). Separately, the independence of thinking from the body in physical terms and the impossibility of interaction are highlighted.
Assuming any change in the body, it is still the same person as long as the same mind is associated with it. Moreover, on this basis, the mind is undoubtedly the most existing quantity and the single most intrinsic characteristic and accessory of the individual. Mind is the essence of the thinking thing itself, presenting its self-consciousness as the only existing fact.
Given Descartes’ religious reflections, the concept of the mind often resonates with the soul. The author does not directly draw a parallel between the two concepts but explicitly acknowledges their connection (Descartes 10). Correspondingly, the relationship between the soul and body on the physical plane is denied.
In this case, the fundamental mistake in the problem of body and mind, according to Descartes, becomes evident: he describes the interaction of these concepts simultaneously while completely denying the intersection of the sphere of existence of the mind and the physical world (12). Doubts about reality and the existence of any object are products of thought, and it is impossible to affirm the existence of anything other than the mind entirely. Beyond this, Descartes believes in the existence of God, who created him as a thinking being as he is (Forsman 95). It is asserted in parallel to the certainty of the truth of the existence of the mind alone and the doubt of everything else. Correspondingly, the philosopher’s religious beliefs do not coincide with the periodic logicality of his reasoning.
Critique of Descartes’ Argument
Firstly, it is necessary to notice the lack of definition of the meaning of being in this philosophical theory. Descartes defines cogito and continues with ergo sum without defining the mere essence of sum. What exactly defines the importance, the clear sense of existence, and the environment in which this existence occurs was not taken into account. Thus, put in place of man’s being, his thinking regards not being as the essence of man but cognition itself. In other words, being is presented as the object of cognition, confronting it as a subject.
Secondly, one cannot fail to note the exceptional subjectivity of Descartes’ philosophy and methods. He provides no objective criteria, conditioning everything solely on his understanding of truth. So, there is a possibility of falling into the logical trap because to prove the truth, the exact notion of truth must be clear and understandable, but the notion is valid only to the extent that it is true. Descartes claims that intellectual intuition can determine subjective truth (11). This idea only underlines the non-objectivity and non-universality of his theory.
Thirdly, this reasoning makes it unclear how the philosopher draws a parallel between personality and thinking. However, he denies the possibility of body and mind influence, and the sheer fact of thinking cannot be identified with personality. By fixing the cognitive process, the corresponding conclusion that was the most logical in this reasoning was: “It thinks.”
In this case, it is implied as an impersonal subject without reference to place or identity. The connection precisely with the person of the thinking thing is unobvious and not justified by the philosopher, which emphasizes the undeveloped nature of this theory. These are just some more apparent remarks to the master’s theory, which has been criticized for years and abandoned almost entirely.
Works Cited
Descartes, Rene. Meditations on First Philosophy. Translated by Donald A. Cress, 3rd ed., Hackett Publishing, 1993.
Forsman, Jan. “Can an Atheist Know That He Exists? Cogito, Mathematics, and God in Descartes’s Meditations.” International Journal for the Study of Skepticism, vol. 9, no. 2, 2019, pp. 91–115. Web.