O. Ntantiso
222167733
Philosophy 2B Term 3 essay
Question 2: “I realized that it was necessary, once in the course of my life, to
demolish everything completely and start again right from the foundations if I
wanted to establish anything at all in the sciences that was stable and likely to
last.” Critically discuss.
Introduction
‘Meditations on First philosophy’ is a thought provoking read that makes you
question most things you ever believed to be true. The first meditation, “What can be
called into doubt.” Is about the reliability of our senses. Rene Descartes in this
meditation attempts to examine knowledge and doubt in order to ensure that all his
beliefs are true and in order to gain certain knowledge. In this essay I will critically
discuss the first meditation based on a quote that can be found in the book as well
as the question. The first section of this essay will discuss the reason why Descartes
seeks to demolish everything he has ever known. The second section will discuss
the senses and how he feels about them. The idea of dreams, God and evil demons
will be discussed as well.
Science based on reason
In this first meditation, Descartes embarks on a process of extreme doubt in which
he questions all he has ever known in order to establish a solid basis for certain
knowledge. Descartes (2017:12) states that in order to do this he has to “demolish
everything completely and start again.” Descartes does this in order to bring a new
basis for science, which is not based on previous philosophers’ knowledge but one
that is based on reason and evidence. He claims that if he is ever to trust the
external world based on scientific knowledge then a new basis for scientific
knowledge which will be impossible to doubt is needed. In simple words, Descartes
uses methodological doubt, and he does this by beginning from a point of complete
doubt. By using methodological doubt, he attempts to have knowledge that is
indubitable. According to Frankfurt and Goldstein (2007:22) Descartes attempts to
“regain the intellectual innocence of a child, while leaving the mature strengths of his
rational power intact.” Descartes radical doubt can be linked to the idea of intellectual
innocence provided by Goldstein and Frankfurt because both ideas include
beginning from the start without any preconceived knowledge and biases in order to
regain certain knowledge.
Unreliability of the senses
The need for freedom from the senses is at the heart of Descartes radical doubt, as
he states that the senses are not to be trusted. Descartes claims that the senses
have previously deceived him, and he argues that one should never trust something
that has previously deceived them before. However, Descartes does state that he
cannot doubt all of his senses, only those that are certain to deceive him, for
example objects that seem too far away or looking at things when there is not
enough light for him to see. Descartes claims that madmen are far worse when it
comes to being deceived by the senses, as they believe they are things that they are
not, like kings when they are just commoners, however he states that he is not like
the madmen. Although he claims not to be a madman, he questions how he can tell
from the real world and the dream world because even in dreams he feels as though
he is awake and sensing real objects. Descartes (2017:13) questions, “How often,
asleep at night, am I convinced of just such familiar events- that I am here in my
dressing gown sitting by the fire when in fact I am lying undressed in bed!” In this
quote, Descartes argues that if the senses can deceive us and make us believe that
we are awake when in reality we are asleep, how can we then trust them when we
are awake. This dream example shows that we cannot trust the senses to give us an
objective view of the world. Descartes concludes that we cannot trust composite
things like the sciences because the sciences are made up of different aspects,
however we can trust simple things like the shape, and size of things. You can’t
doubt the shape of a single square, but you can doubt a bunch of squares put
together.
Evil demon argument
Even though Descartes doubts most things, the belief of God, is the one belief that is
so deeply rooted in his mind that it is hard to fully doubt. He believes that he is the
person that he is because God created him, however the question remains as to why
God would deceive him if he created him and is all powerful and righteous,
Descartes (2017:14) claims, “God would not have allowed me to be deceived in this
way, since he is said to be supremely good.” Instead of believing that God is the one
deceiving him, Descartes then proposes a new theory, that perhaps and evil demon
is the one controlling him and deceiving him. He does this in order to explore the
limits to his method of doubt, because Descartes does actually believe that God is
the one who is guiding him in his perceptions. By claiming that the demon is tricking
him, he is attempting to prevent himself from being led astray by this terrible
creature.
Conclusion
In conclusion, Descartes' approach of scepticism may be applied to enhance the
work of future philosophers because by casting doubt on what he knows, he is able
to establish some certainties that can act as the foundation for further philosophical
investigation. It's also crucial to realize that Descartes does not just doubt everything
without giving any justification; rather, he follows up his extreme scepticism with
justifications for his doubts.
References
Descartes, R., Cottingham, J. and Williams, B. (2017) Meditations on first philosophy
with selections from the objections and replies. Cambridge, United Kingdom:
Cambridge University Press.
Frankfurt, H., Goldstein R. (2007). Demons, Dreamers, and Madmen: The defence
of reason in Descartes “Meditations”- Princeton University Press