Introduction
Understanding the self is probably one of the greatest intellectual challenges for humans. Philosophers have undertaken the challenging task of developing insight into the nature of the human self. In most cases, they come up with different conclusions and often give conflicting arguments to support their conclusions. The main aim of this paper is to look into the arguments presented by Rene Descartes and David Hume on the issue of the self.
In the paper, the author will analyze how the two philosophers view the issues that differentiate one’s particular “self” from that of the others. A critical analysis of the arguments made by the two philosophers reveals that Descartes puts forward a more convincing argument than Hume. The reason is that Hume opposes theories that claim a simple idea of the self. He regards them as incoherent. He also voices strong objections to the idea that there could be no impression of the self. However, he does not provide enough evidence to support his position. He acknowledges that others may find an impression of the self, yet he does not.
Hume’s position of the self is also very confusing. In some instances, he disregards the existence of the self. However, in other parts of the treatise, he allows for that very possibility. In addition, one cannot help but wonder why Hume first proves that there is no impression of the self and then goes ahead to look for it. He contradicts himself since he claims that one can discover their self through reflection. But when he does this, he claims to find no indication of himself.
The Nature of Self-Knowledge: Descartes’ and Hume’s Philosophical Positions
Hume and Descartes hold different views regarding the issue of the essence of the self. For instance, Descartes takes an entirely new and thoroughly modern approach to understand the perspective of the self. To this end, the philosopher takes a deep and critical look into the individual’s thinking processes. He came up with the cogito principle to try to explain the existence of the self (Descartes, 2008). On the other hand, David Hume is a bundle theorist. He holds the view that the self is nothing but a bundle of experiences. The experiences are linked together by the dynamics associated with causation and remembrance (Hume, 2007).
Descartes’ Perspective of the Self
The philosopher is well known for his writings on this topic. He provides ground for all forms of knowledge. He came to the conclusion that the ground was located in the self-awareness of his own existence (Descartes, 2008). He came up with the concept of cogito ergo sum. In modern English, this conception can be translated as “I am conscious therefore I exist” (Descartes, 2008). In his book, the philosopher argues that one cannot coherently doubt their own existence as a conscious thinking entity. The reason is that the very act of doubting implies their reality. In other words, one can never truly say “I do not exist”. He explains that even if one is dreaming or hallucinating, the self is still engaged. The reality remains even in cases where the consciousness of the individual is manipulated by an external agent (Descartes, 2008).
Descartes goes further to answer the question of what exactly exists when one is said to be living in reality. The philosopher concludes that the self that is known to exist is a form of consciousness. He views it as a reflection of selfsame awareness. In addition, it represents single, simple, and ongoing thoughts of one’s awareness. He describes the mind as a substance that can be defined by thought. The reason is that this component of the self can affirm, judge, and even doubt (Descartes, 2008). In conclusion, Descartes reaffirms that he is certain of his existence for a number of reasons. To start with, the fact that he is thinking is a clear indication of his reality. The existence comes to an end once the individual stops thinking. As such, one can conclude that individuals are thinking about things (Descartes, 2008).
The weaknesses of Descartes’ understanding of the self
Descartes’ argument on self-awareness raises a number of issues and questions with regards to the way he reasons. For instance, the philosopher infers his existence from the fact that he thinks (Descartes, 2008). One may counter this position by assuming the existence of an all-powerful evil demon. In light of this, one may argue that the evil powers made Descartes err in his thinking. The possibility highlights a major weakness of this argument.
One also wonders what exactly Desecrates refers to as “I”. He uses this concept to support his arguments relating to existence. On one hand, one may argue that the “I” refers to a thinking object. If this is true, then it means that Descartes’ arguments are nothing more than mere philosophical fraud. The reason is that the object would have already surmised that it exists as a thinking phenomenon (Descartes, 2008).
One also wonders why Descartes has no reservations about the implications of his arguments with regards to his doubts. There is a likelihood that the philosopher may doubt the words he is using. If this happens, then it will be hard for him to voice his doubts. As such, the attempt to doubt anything would be self-defeatist.
Hume’s Perspective of the Self
Hume tries to explain his position on the self in his book “A Treatise of Human Nature”. The scholar starts by highlight the beliefs of many philosophers. The academicians are of the view that human beings are conscious of the existence of the self. However, a look into past experiences reveals that there is nothing to substantiate this belief (Hume, 2007). Unlike Descartes, Hume says that humans are unaware of any constant invariable impression that indicates the presence of the self.
Hume explains that individuals undergo a coherent progression of perceptions. The flow replaces one another in rapid succession (Hume, 2007). The view contradicts Descartes’ assertion of a constant ‘dynamic’ indicating the existence of the self. Hume (2007) captures these sentiments by stating that, “When I enter most intimately into what I call myself (…) I always stumble on some particular perception or other, of heat or cold, love or hatred, light or shade” (252). However, Hume seems to agree with Descartes when he argues that awareness permeates every aspect of the being. The perceptions can be equated to Descartes’ idea of reality.
Hume explains how these statuses of awareness successively make their appearance. They interact in an infinite variety of combinations (Hume, 2007). To this end, every real idea must be derived from the impressions unique to the self. The view is similar to Descartes’ illustration of the existence of the self. Hume concludes that the self or the person is not any one’s impression. On the contrary, it implies a set of experiences and ideas that humans make reference to (Hume, 2007).
Weaknesses of Hume’s arguments
Like Descartes’ ideas, Hume’s perspective has a number of limitations. A critical review of the section on personality identity in the Treatise may make one think that the philosopher was confused in his explanation of the “self”. For instance, he argues that each of our perceptions is “a distinct existence”. Each existence ‘exists’ independent of all the others (Hume, 2007). What this implies is that a given perception does not have any real connection with others.
As such, it is not possible to properly extrapolate the actual content of an individual’s experiences. Hume appears ignorant of the fact that the individual may establish links with themself by employing a number of special techniques. Such techniques include yoga and meditation. Hume contradicts himself by claiming that one can find their self through reflection, but he is unable to do so. The facts that Hume provides to question the existence of the self are inadequate. The evidence is very weak.
Conclusion: Descartes’ Superior Position
A critical look at the arguments presented by the two philosophers makes it apparent that Descartes presents a better perspective that is more convincing compared to that provided by Hume. He presents a strong and solid argument without contradicting himself. He provides a lot of evidence to clearly bring out his position on the understanding of self. Descartes achieves an understanding of the self by studying material objects.
One such object includes wax. To this end, he concludes that his understanding of material things is very significant. He talks of the various aspects of an object, including size and shape. As a result, the philosopher is aware of the capabilities of his mind. He acknowledges his ability to perceive and understand the object. Such an evidence-based conclusion persuades one to lean towards Descartes’ argument in spite of the few apparent shortcomings. He avoids the mistake committed by Hume, who constantly contradicts himself.
References
Descartes, R. (2008). A discourse on method (4th ed.). New York: Read Books.
Hume, D. (2007). A treatise of human nature. Oxford: Clarendon Press.