Descartes discourse on method part 4. Rene Descartes Discourse on the Method Part 4 2022-10-31
Descartes discourse on method part 4 Rating:
René Descartes' Discourse on Method is a philosophical treatise published in 1637 that outlines the French philosopher's philosophical and scientific method for arriving at truth. In Part Four of the Discourse, Descartes discusses the importance of mathematics in his method and explains how he uses mathematical principles to arrive at certain knowledge.
One of the key principles that Descartes emphasizes in Part Four is the idea that mathematical truths are certain and indubitable. Unlike other forms of knowledge, which can be doubted or challenged, mathematical truths are absolute and cannot be disputed. Descartes believes that this certainty is essential to his method, because it allows him to use mathematics as a foundation for his reasoning and to build upon this foundation in order to arrive at other truths.
In addition to the certainty of mathematics, Descartes also emphasizes the importance of clarity and distinctness in his method. He believes that it is essential to have clear and distinct ideas in order to arrive at truth, and he uses the example of geometry to illustrate this point. In geometry, one must have a clear and distinct understanding of the various shapes and their properties in order to arrive at conclusions about them. Descartes believes that this same principle applies to all forms of knowledge and that it is essential to have clear and distinct ideas in order to arrive at truth.
Another important aspect of Descartes' method that he discusses in Part Four is the role of doubt in arriving at truth. Descartes believes that it is essential to doubt everything that is uncertain or open to doubt in order to arrive at certain knowledge. This includes doubting even the most basic and seemingly self-evident truths, such as the existence of the external world or the reliability of one's own senses. By doubting everything and starting from scratch, Descartes believes that it is possible to arrive at certain knowledge that is beyond doubt.
In conclusion, Descartes' Discourse on Method is a powerful philosophical treatise that outlines his method for arriving at truth. In Part Four, Descartes emphasizes the importance of mathematics, clarity and distinctness, and doubt in his method and shows how these principles can be used to arrive at certain knowledge. His ideas have had a significant impact on the development of modern philosophy and continue to be influential today.
6.3: Rene Descartes: Discourse on Method (Part 4)
This pretty much leaves everything we know our but Descartes notes that there is one thing that cannot be doubted and that is that there is someone or something thing which is doubting. Descartes believed that nothing can be perceived more easily and evidently than his own mind. At the same time, Descartes recognizes that some persons will deny the existence of God and decides to grant that God is an illusion. His third maxim is to try to master himself and not external factors, to work to change his desires rather than the world. Descartes argued that because he thought, then he lived. Ideally, we come to see our thoughts as the one thing we have control over, and to recognize that if even with our best efforts we cannot change something in the world, then that thing is, for all intents and purposes, impossible to change. Accordingly, seeing that our senses sometimes deceive us, I was willing to suppose that there existed nothing really such as they presented to us; and because some men err in reasoning, and fall into paralogisms, even on the simplest matters of geometry, I, convinced that I was as open to error as any other, rejected as false all the reasonings I had hitherto taken for demonstrations; and finally, 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.
And as I observed that in the words I think, therefore I am, there is nothing at all which gives me assurance of their truth beyond this, that I see very clearly that in order to think it is necessary to exist, I concluded that I might take, as a general rule, the principle, that all the things which we very clearly and distinctly conceive are true, only observing, however, that there is some difficulty in rightly determining the objects which we distinctly conceive. Accessed December 30, 2022. All of these things lead him back to where he started at the beginning of his writing. DISCOURSE ON THE METHOD PART IV Submitted by Juliet Barnett HUMANITIES 112 Prof. Descartes notes that his idea of God, which involves the concept of numerous perfections, could not be a creation of his own imagination. The arguments he stated has successfully convinced me that there is in fact a God, the arguments put forth establishes specific truths….
I was disposed straightway to search for other truths and when I had represented to myself the object of the geometers, which I conceived to be a continuous body or a space indefinitely extended in length, breadth, and height or depth, divisible into divers parts which admit of different figures and sizes, and of being moved or transposed in all manner of ways for all this the geometers suppose to be in the object they contemplate , I went over some of their simplest demonstrations. Namely that whatever we think of and see as REFERENCES Bennett, J. Second, to divide any given problem into the greatest possible number of parts to make for a simpler analysis. Descartes would count himself among this second group if he hadn't had such a number of teachers and embarked on so many travels as to realize that the opinions of even learned men vary greatly. Very much like in his later " ", Descartes decides to abandon any sensory information on the charge that those have been known to deceive us. This is known as the metaphysical doubt.
For, in the first place even the principle which I have already taken as a rule, viz. Summary René "I think, therefore I am" is the belief that Descartes discovers as indubitable. He concludes that a perfect being, such as God, must be responsible for the existence of all imperfect things because one cannot exist without the other. His instigation of fresh concepts sweeping away the traditional philosophical prejudices had revolutionized human minds ideologies. Also the Method of doubt tells us not to acknowledge anything unless you identify it to be true. And as I observed that in the words I think, therefore I am, there is nothing at all which gives me assurance of their truth beyond this, that I see very clearly that in order to think it is necessary to exist, I concluded that I might take, as a general rule, the principle, that all the things which we very clearly and distinctly conceive are true, only observing, however, that there is some difficulty in rightly determining the objects which we distinctly conceive. Descartes commences his argument by first establishing his idea of being a thinking being.
For in order to know the nature of God whose existence has been established by the preceding reasonings , as far as my own nature permitted, I had only to consider in reference to all the properties of which I found in my mind some idea, whether their possession was a mark of perfection; and I was assured that no one which indicated any imperfection was in him, and that none of the rest was awanting. He considers that he should free himself of all false learning keeping in mind the end goal is to acquire any genuine information. For his method to function seamlessly, Descartes needs to be consistent in his use of the method, that is, he must continue to doubt and challenge thoughts that originate in his own mind. Anselm states that God is "the being than which none greater can be imagined. First, I will explain why Descartes ask the question, does god exist? Not only will this save him from never acting since certainty is hard to find but it will also save him from any future regrets he would experience if he were less decisive. For in order to know the nature of God whose existence has been established by the preceding reasonings , as far as my own nature permitted, I had only to consider in reference to all the properties of which I found in my mind some idea, whether their possession was a mark of perfection; and I was assured that no one which indicated any imperfection was in him, and that none of the rest was awanting. If there is no obviously true and certain decision to be made, Descartes opts for the most probably right decision, and treats that decision as if it were true and certain.
And to this I added that, since I knew some perfections which I did not possess, I was not the only being in existence I will here, with your permission, freely use the terms of the schools ; but, on the contrary, that there was of necessity some other more perfect Being upon whom I was dependent, and from whom I had received all that I possessed; for if I had existed alone, and independently of every other being, so as to have had from myself all the perfection, however little, which I actually possessed, I should have been able, for the same reason, to have had from myself the whole remainder of perfection, of the want of which I was conscious, and thus could of myself have become infinite, eternal, immutable, omniscient, all-powerful, and, in fine, have possessed all the perfections which I could recognize in God. Both methods will aid on moving from one truth to another and gain a better understanding of knowledge. Retrieved from eBook Collection Descartes Meditation 1 Analysis After this doubt Descartes reasons that rather than a Deity, it is an evil demon that deceives him. He proves that God exists because he wants to be certain about things outside of himself. Secondly, I will explain, in detail, the arguments that Descartes makes and how he comes to the conclusion that God does exist.
Descartes suggest that our sense experience, imagination, and will are all a part of the The surprise ending comes when he did not intend to prove or disprove the existence of The ending was easy to accept because, I as a Christian know that our souls do make us who we are and that God is perfect and the truth. Even in doubting all this, however, he observes that he must be something in order to doubt. But after the knowledge of God and of the soul has rendered us certain of this rule, we can easily understand that the truth of the thoughts we experience when awake, ought not in the slightest degree to be called in question on account of the illusions of our dreams. But since God is by definition the greatest being that can be imagined, it cannot be the case that he does not exist. At the beginning of the article he tried desperately to find a solution for this thoughts and even his own existence, he even tried to pretend that his own thoughts were illusions of his dreams and his own existence was even questioned. Where Descartes does not explicitly state that everyone has the idea of a perfect being in their mind, Anselm does state this in his argument. Hence, he concludes that the idea of a perfect being must have been placed in his thoughts by that perfect being—by God.
Cultural Reader: Descartes / part 4 of Discourse on the Method
Another statement that took me by surprise was when he stated that God was in us. And because our reasonings are never so clear or so complete during sleep as when we are awake, although sometimes the acts of our imagination are then as lively and distinct, if not more so than in our waking moments, reason further dictates that, since all our thoughts cannot be true because of our partial imperfection, those possessing truth must infallibly be found in the experience of our waking moments rather than in that of our dreams. Similarly, we cannot have mountains without the necessity of having valleys as well. Descartes argues that not even the greatest human mind "can give any reason sufficient to remove this doubt, unless they presuppose the existence of God. And, in the first place, I observed, that the great certitude which by common consent is accorded to these demonstrations, is founded solely upon this, that they are clearly conceived in accordance with the rules I have already laid down In the next place, I perceived that there was nothing at all in these demonstrations which could assure me of the existence of their object: thus, for example, supposing a triangle to be given, I distinctly perceived that its three angles were necessarily equal to two right angles, but I did not on that account perceive anything which could assure me that any triangle existed: while, on the contrary, recurring to the examination of the idea of a Perfect Being, I found that the existence of the Being was comprised in the idea in the same way that the equality of its three angles to two right angles is comprised in the idea of a triangle, or as in the idea of a sphere, the equidistance of all points on its surface from the center, or even still more clearly; and that consequently it is at least as certain that God, who is this Perfect Being, is, or exists, as any demonstration of geometry can be.
I was disposed straightway to search for other truths and when I had represented to myself the object of the geometers, which I conceived to be a continuous body or a space indefinitely extended in length, breadth, and height or depth, divisible into divers parts which admit of different figures and sizes, and of being moved or transposed in all manner of ways for all this the geometers suppose to be in the object they contemplate , I went over some of their simplest demonstrations. There was a firm confirmation of the existence of man as he claimed this basic knowledge, referring it as a distinctively clear perception that is very certain and free from doubt. In the next place, from reflecting on the circumstance that I doubted, and that consequently my being was not wholly perfect for I clearly saw that it was a greater perfection to know than to doubt , I was led to inquire whence I had learned to think of something more perfect than myself; and I clearly recognized that I must hold this notion from some nature which in reality was more perfect. Accordingly, whereas we not infrequently have ideas or notions in which some falsity is contained, this can only be the case with such as are to some extent confused and obscure, and in this proceed from nothing participate of negation , that is, exist in us thus confused because we are not wholly perfect. Method of inquiry advises that you approach questions in an orderly fashion. Summary In part four, the most important part of the Discourse, Descartes describes the results of his meditations following the method he previously laid down. In particular, he notes that there are two types of people for whom this method would be unsuited: those who think they know more than they do and who lack the patience for such careful work, and those who are modest enough to think that they are more capable of finding out the truth if they follow a teacher.
And yet, that it may be determined whether the foundations that I have laid are sufficiently secure, I find myself in a measure constrained to advert to them. Rene Descartes was an admirable individual due to his contributions to philosophy, his remarkable findings in mathematics, and his explanations of the physical world that are still relevant today. In fact, God's existence is more certain than anything else, since all other things are subject to the doubts that Descartes has already raised. Besides, I had ideas of many sensible and corporeal things; for although I might suppose that I was dreaming, and that all which I saw or imagined was false, I could not, nevertheless, deny that the ideas were in reality in my thoughts. Descartes arrives at another proof of God's existence by way of geometry.