Descartes and the Skeptics: An Incomplete Case Essay

Introduction

A French philosopher, mathematician and scientist, Rene Descartes (1596-1650) introduced a shift in thinking from the empiricist school of thought to the rationalist school of thought. The empiricist school of thought held that all knowledge ultimately comes to us through our senses. The rationalist school of thought introduced by Descartes holds that human reason is the source for all human knowledge. He is often called the father of modern philosophy for this shift in thinking. Through this development in thought, he was also the founder of modern day mathematics and provided the framework for study of the natural sciences. In developing these ideas, Descartes wrote several books regarding the nature of existence and knowledge, which has had tremendous influence on those who have come after him. In answering the challenge of the skeptics regarding the source of knowledge, Descartes published Discourse on Method in 1637 in which he presents his argument supporting the rationalist theory. He summed up his argument with a line that continues to be quoted in and out of context today: “I think, therefore I am.” By studying the writings that led up to this concept as expressed in Discourse on Method and comparing them with further attempts to refine this idea within a subsequent book Meditations on First Philosophy, one must conclude that Descartes cannot fully overcome the challenge of skepticism with this argument.

Being among the first to question the dominant Aristotelian schools of thought that had so dominated academic thought throughout the ages and approaching the subject from the mathematical field rather than the traditional philosophical stance, Descartes was in the unique position of providing an alternative path for philosophy to take. “According to Descartes, the four rules of logic were: to accept as true only those conclusions which were clearly and distinctly known to be true; to divide difficulties under examination into as many parts as possible for their better solution; to conduct thought in order, and to proceed step by step from the simplest and easiest to know, to more complex language; and in every case to take a general view so as to be sure of having omitted nothing” (Kandaswamy n.d.). Reading through these steps, the linkage of thought to mathematical methods of analysis can be clearly traced as one examines his argument.

Descartes’ cogito argument

The simple-sounding statement of “I think, therefore I am” succinctly sums up what has become referred to as Descartes’ cogito argument. It is the result of a systematic discourse in which Descartes calls into question all of the assumptions he’s come to know as a result of the philosophical thought of his day. “I had long before remarked that … it is sometimes necessary to adopt, as if above doubt, opinions which we discern to be highly uncertain” (Descartes, 2001). In order to discover the highest version of the truth possible, Descartes felt it was necessary to question every assumption of knowledge that had even the shadow of a doubt. He did this by analyzing every instance of assumption he could find for its supporting data, much like a computer might analyze every document in a hard drive for its supporting links. Through this questioning process, he demonstrates how thought, not observation is really the right foundation for knowledge. “When I considered that the very same thoughts (presentations) which we experience when awake may also be experienced when we are asleep, while there is at that time not one of them true, I supposed that all the objects (presentations) that had ever entered into my mind when awake, had in them no more truth than the illusions of my dreams” (Descartes, 2001). His idea of discovering truths about the world was defined by whether he had a clear and distinct perception of them and determined that this ‘clear and distinct’ perception was sufficient for knowledge.

However, the idea that knowledge can be defined by a “clear and distinct perception” is foiled by its own dependence on the senses as the senses can often be fooled. Acknowledging this, Descartes argues his way out of this idea by indicating that in order to fool a mind, a mind must first exist. “But there is I know not what being, who is possessed at once of the highest power and the deepest cunning, who is constantly employing all his ingenuity in deceiving me. Doubtless, then, I exist, since I am deceived; and, let him deceive me as he may, he can never bring it about that I am nothing, so long as I shall be conscious that I am something” (Descartes, 1989). Regardless of the way in which it’s presented, though, there is a hole in the logic that states thought instead of the senses is the basis for truth while the evidence of correct thought is a clear and distinct sense that what is thought is correct. In his arguments regarding the nature and existence of God, Descartes goes on to say that it does not matter whether we are dreaming or not because whatever our intellect tells us is true is, in fact, true. This directly contradicts what he said earlier regarding dreams being little more than impressions that did not exist and did not necessarily represent what was true.

Descartes’ full circle

Therefore, in pursuing a definition of the truth, Descartes came around full circle. From denying the existence of everything that had the shadow of a doubt, including everything known through the senses and seemingly intuitively, he argued his way through the idea that thought completely separated from sense was the necessary basis for knowledge and that the only correct thought was thought that carried with it the sense that it was clear and distinct. “He developed a dualistic system in which he distinguished radically between mind, the essence of which is thinking, and matter, the essence of which is extension in three dimensions. Descartes’ metaphysical system is intuitionist, derived by reason from innate ideas, but his physics and physiology, based on sensory knowledge, are mechanistic and empiricist” (Watson 2002). Through the meditations included in Meditations on First Philosophy, Descartes presents his logical sequence leading to the idea that since God exists, all knowledge must come from him and therefore, whether we are dreaming or awake, our perceptions of our reality must be real. It’s a self-contradicting circle that simply doesn’t make sense when taken in its entirety.

Conclusion

The discussion surrounding this statement as well as the process by which Descartes arrived at this conclusion and the branches of thought that arise from these discussions, has proved to be the foundation upon which most modern philosophical commentary has been focused. “The philosophy of Descartes had a profound impact on the philosophers and theologians of his day” (Woolston 2004). Several of the major thinkers of his day either took up pains to support Descartes’ views or to reject them and prove them false. From these discussions came the branches of thought regarding what made up the human spirit and just how was this connected with the human body. “Descartes’ influence in philosophy cannot be underestimated. The epistemic foundation, presuppositionless systems, the mind/body problem, and the subject/object relationship are issues that haunt philosophy to the present day. In one fell swoop, Descartes split apart you and the external world. Much of later philosophy is spent trying to get these two together somehow” (Davis 1997). In the years that followed, the Empiricists worked to deny any kind of nonmaterial realm “and they denied Descartes’ assertion that there is a distinct substance existing independently from the senses or from the physical world. The Materialists argued that the universe is nothing more than matter in motion moving through space. They maintained that the mind is nothing more than a process of physical phenomena just as breathing and defecating are natural processes, and that there is no warrant for asserting the ‘soul itself’ as existing independently in some realm” (Woolston 2004). Regardless of whether they agree or disagree with Descartes’ original thoughts, processes and premises, though, the fact remains that it is Descartes and the realm of ideas he brought forward that they are basing their arguments upon, thereby underscoring and reinforcing the concept that Descartes is the father of modern philosophy.

Works Cited

Davis, W. The Rene Descartes Project. Covenant College. (1997). 2008. Web.

Descartes, Rene. Meditations on First Philosophy. Trans. John Veitch. New York: Prometheus Books, 1989.

Descartes, René. Discourse on Method. Vol. XXXIV, Part 1. The Harvard Classics. New York: P.F. Collier & Son, 1909–14; Bartleby, 2001. Web.

Kandaswamy, D. The Key to Geometry: A Pair of Perpendicular Lines. New Brunswick: Rutgers Mathematics Department, 2006.

Watson, R. “Rene Descartes: 1596-1650.” The Encyclopedia Britannica. Scottsdale, AR: Pearson Software, 2002.

Woolston, C.S. “Rene Descartes: Mind vs. Body.” Dynamic Deism. (2004). Web.