The meditation on first philosophy is actually one of Rene Descartes’s most popular works. Thus, in meditation I, Descartes attempts to prove that the minimum epistemological assumptions, that is, assumptions about how we know require us only to accept indubitable processes of thinking as all else is eventually subjected to radical doubt.
In meditation II,he urgues that whether there is a Great Deceiver, the subject can actually be quite certain of his own existence. The other key argument in meditation II is Descartes’s theory of dualism in which his analysis of candle wax actually leads him to the conclusion that bodies are better known by understanding rather than senses.
Meditation I
Of the things which may be brought within the sphere of the doubtful Descartes starts by confessing that, over the years, there are many false beliefs that had previously considered as true. Thus, for him to establish a genuine scientific basis, he had to rid himself of the previously held opinions as either being true or false.
This is the only way through which he would establish a firm and permanent reliable super structure in the sciences. But he could not do this immediately as he had to wait upon some advancement in age to execute his thought. So he waited to attain this age so as to be able to leave himself no hope that at any one stage in the advanced age so that he could readily execute his plan.
On this account, therefore, he delayed so as he could balance through careful consideration that he was doing no wrong at the time remaining for the final action. Now that he had freed his mind from all the worries, and that he was no longer disturbed by passions that could distract him from executing his plan uninhibited, he was in a much secure possession of leisure and in a peaceable retirement to apply himself earnestly and stealthily to discard freely all his former opinions.
But to that particular end, it does not mean that it would not be important for him that the rest is false. This is a point perhaps he could never reach. However, his reason told him that he ought not carefully withhold the belief in whatever is not entirely in doubt from that which projected itself as being manifestly false.
Otherwise, this would sufficiently justify his rejecting the whole, if all he finds in it is any ground for doubt. It would for that purpose not be necessary to deal with each belief individually. This would amount to a tedious and endless undertaking, since owing to the fact that the removal of any of the foundations of necessity did really involve the failure of the whole edifice. He would thus prioritize attacking the very foundations upon which all his former opinions rested.
For a very long time, Descartes did accept to be true the fact that he had learned either from the senses or even sometimes, through the senses; though at times, it has come to his knowledge that senses do not pass the reliability test as they are at times deceptive. This makes it important for one not to trust them in entirety. This calls for wisdom to make this move since it is actually wise not to trust entirely something that has ever deceived you.
Though senses have once deceived us, it is wrong to doubt everything that comes out them. The senses prove quite unreliable with the issues that are far withdrawn from our realm or those that are far removed such that they are beyond the reach of our close observation.
There are, however, instances in which we cannot doubt the senses. For example, it is almost impossible to doubt that you are in “this particular place, either seated by the fire, either dressed in a winter gown or you are holding this particular paper in your hand plus many other intimations of similar nature” he adds.
Here, you will probably trust the senses. What may be in doubt, may be something that is hardly perceptible. But could he deny that the hands he possesses are his? If this denial would suffice, one would not escape being classed with insane persons, whose brain is quite disordered to a level that they in real sense consider themselves as monarchs when they are in real sense poor people.
Consequently, one has to remember that he/she is a human being who is in the habit of sleeping and who dreams and gets representations that are same as the ones in reality, while at times having to dream of probable or even improbable situations. For example, Descartes says that many a times he has dreamt that he was seated by the fire only to wake up and find he was sleeping undressed.
But in the waking moments, he does recognize that that was a dream. So, one can believe that he/she is looking at a paper only when one’s eyes are wide open. But in sleep, he says that he had been deceived by similar illusions. Thinking this over, he observed that what goes on during sleeping is neither clearer nor more distinct as when one is awake.
Descartes goes ahead and equates what we dream during sleep to mere representations than of the real existent things that appear in the real world. Just like the products of artists, what is seen in sleep is like a painted representation as done by an artist. He feels that in as much as the artists endeavor torepresent whatever they work on as accurately as possible as the things that appear in reality, theirs do fall short of the natures of the original.
They cannot give those things natures that are totally new. They do copy from what is existent. If they tried to represent something that has never been perceived before them, that art of representation can be said to be false or fictitious, though the colours by which the representation is made of may be real. He further does concede that there are some things that include real colours and images which dwell on thoughts whether true or false or even fantastic that are formed.
From the above reasoning, he feels that physis, astronomy and all the other sciences that do only consider composite objects as being of doubtful character.
Nevertheless, the belief that there does exist an all powerful God who created him has also obtained a steady possession of Descartes’s mind. But what of if his perception about the very perceptions are not as intended by the deity?
He feels perhaps the deity must not have planned that there be neither earth, sky nor any other thing as he perceives in matters that they do not believe in, for example,‘that the square has got only four sides.’ He doubts if the deity has been described and known to be possessing all goodness. Though, he does permit for him to be deceived.
Descartes does observe that there are many who may be tempted to deny the existence of a powerful being. He further advises such should not be condemned. All that is said of the existence of a God is fabulous.
But in whatever way he had come to be, whether attributable to fate, accident or through a continuum of antecedents, it would be a big mistake to demean whoever is assigned to be author of his origin to be of lesser authority. He did not want by sheer emotion or wish to demean any thought or claim. The ancient and commonly held opinions kept on coming back and forth his mind. One should be careful lest these opinions change clear search of knowledge.
He says that there is always the temptation of also having to refute all the opinions held as being false, which is dangerous. The last measure he proposes is to hold that these are just opinions and to an extent doubtful. It is unlike taking all those long held opinions to be doubtful or just imaginary until the time reaches when he objectively balances between former prejudices and the present prejudices to get the truth. If this balance is not achieved, there could be a big likelihood of his jugdement being tilted either way.
But the question at hand to him was a search for knowledge. There could be some evil out to deceive him continually through illusion that this genius has availed. Since it was not possible for him to draw any judgment, he decided to suspend that judgement since he could not tell which among the opinions was true.
Meditation II
Of the nature of the human mind and that it is more easily known than the body.
Argument One
Descartes starts this by observing that the previous meditation had filled his mind with several doubts unforgetable. Though he found ways of showing them, he was like somebody who had all of a sudden fallen into very deep water and was so confused on whether to swim, put his legs in the bottom or attempt to support himself at the surface of the water. He therefore decided to follow the same path as he had followed in meditation I. He was to discard anything that had slightest doubt in it as if it were false.
Therefore, he set out to discard and distrust all the memories he had once held and believed that everything was false. That meant even believing that nothing ever existed, that he possessed no senses, body, figure and even movement, things which are just but figments of imagination. He supposes that he is confused and avers that there is nothing to prove to him that everything else is real.
Later on, Descartes observes that there must be a being that is putting those deceptive perceptions in his mind. However, upon further reflection, he feels that the thoughts he has held for long sent him into believing that even he himself does not exist. But after further introspection, he feels that he must be existing and that is why he was being deceived by the cunning being. This also made him reach to the conclusion that the ‘I am’ and ‘I exist’ is indeed true.
Argument Two
Here Descartes feels that though he exists, he does not know who he actually is. This sends him into taking his former opinions about what he was so as not to place himself into some other object. But even under these considerations of the body and movement, he says that he did not consider the place of the soul.
He observes that if he supposes that he has no body, then what could be that which takes nourishment, movement and sensation? He also views perception as affecting so many things as he perceives so many things which change upon his waking up. He feels that the moment he stops thinking, then his perception will have gone and that should be limited to things that he is aware of only.
To him, the mind has own distinct nature. He says so after realizing that one is not just an individual who thinks, doubts, wills, affirms etc. But the mind seems to reach the conclusions through the other organs of the body. These aid mind in perceiving. The mind has the power of imaging things and this cannot be in doubt.
He says that there is feeling that cannot be equated to thinking and things perceived through this feeling are real and false. The mind is big and does not limit itself only to the things that are only whose existence is clear but also to those whose very existence seems dubious. However, it may be more regulated and controlled. Some matters cannot be taken to as completely comprehended, he gives the example of wax and honey.
One sees it in the form that changes, yet it still remains honey by any means. There emerges an infinitude of changes that the mind must accept plus all the other changes that are unknown for example when it is boiled and yet greatly changes when the heat is increased. But looking at the wax issue, it is easy to tell that it was the same one feels, touches or even sees, yet it is very difficult to understand the different changes it undergoes.
So one can conclusively say that its perception and not its visualization nor touch and even imagination can lead to knowing what it is. This simple analogy shows the great feebleness of the mind: it is so much prone to error. From it, therefore, Descartes says that he could say that he only knew wax not through an act of intuition but visionvision only. The external senses can easily mislead us into thinking that we know or fully understand something.
Descartes finally admits he has own mind and that with the wax issue he has been able to understand himself more clearly. For he judges that the wax exists by seeing it, he himself also exists just from the fact that he can see it that he exists. Also if something else persuades himself to the existence of the wax, then for sure that wax exists. He concludes that bodies are not known properly by senses and imagination but through understanding and this is something he considers a great new knowledge.