Zollinger 1
Jacob Zollinger
Professor Hill
Introduction to Philosophy
2 August 2010
Descartes
The world Rene Descartes entered on 31 March 1596 was not a peaceful one. Europe was
convulsed by religious conflicts, yet at the very same time mankind’s greatest and most powerful
achievements, science, was in the process of being born. The scientific revolution marked the birth of
another period we call modern times. Because the reformation and Counter-Reformation were tearing
holes in the certainties of religious belief, the scientific revolution could begin. By allowing the light of
secular reason to shine through the gashes, and once people started to see by that light it became
inextinguishable. Despite the terrors of intolerance, persecution, and recurrent bitter war, the turn of
the seventeenth century was a time rich in promise. Descartes entered it just at the right moment,
because his interests and gifts tallied exactly with what was required for the longer-term intellectual
revolution.1 Descartes was a Catholic, but he argued that each individual possesses the “natural right of
reason” and needs no intervening authority to interpret “the great book of the world” this may remind
of Martin Luther’s claim that each person can go directly to God without the church as an intermediary.
Descartes, like Luther, set aside the so-called accumulated wisdom of the past, insisting that each
person must examine what is true for them.
In Descartes’ time, the distinction between science and philosophy was not clear. His interests
and abilities in philosophy, mathematics, and science made this confusion especially intolerable to him.
1
Descartes: The Life and Times of a Genius
Zollinger 2
He expected scientific claims to be provable by appeals to observation and clear thinking. So he came
up with a new radical proposal. Lets start fresh, throwing out everything we think we know, and build a
new system of knowledge based entirely on ideas, with truths that that can be clearly and distinctly
known to us first hand. Descartes said, “I entirely abandoned the study of letters. Resolving to seek no
knowledge other than that of which could be found in myself or else in the great book of the world, I
spent the rest of my youth traveling, visiting courts and armies, mixing with people of diverse
temperaments and ranks, gathering various experiences, testing myself in the situations which fortune
offered me, and at all times reflecting upon whatever came my way so as to derive some profit from it.”2
All the philosophers before Descartes kept adding to the old teaching, or they would change the
principles that they disagreed with. For Descartes to totally throw out all the prior teaching and start
fresh with a new system of thinking was a huge achievement.
Descartes believed that mathematically precise method was the only reliable way to discover
the truth about the universe. He proposed to use the new spirit of scientific inquiry and mathematical
rigor to reexamine everything. “Common sense,” which Descartes also referred to as natural reason, is
the ability to think that is found in all normal humans. Though not everyone has the talent for or
interest in refined thinking, Descartes believed all reasoning individuals could apply his method to basic
questions concerning human nature, truth and the existence of God. In his effort to base his philosophy
on an absolutely certain foundation, Descartes had a very important insight. He discovered methodic
doubt. Methodic doubt involves deliberately doubting everything that is possible to doubt in the least
degree. Whatever remains after that, is known with absolute certainty.
In epistemology, criteria of truth (or tests of truth) are standards and rules used to judge the
accuracy of statements and claims. They are tools of verification. Understanding a philosophy's criteria
2
Descartes, Discourse on the Method
Zollinger 3
of truth is fundamental to a clear evaluation of that philosophy. This necessity is driven by the varying,
and conflicting, claims of different philosophies. The rules of logic have no ability to distinguish truth on
their own. An individual must determine what standards distinguish truth from falsehood. Not all
criteria are equally valid. Some standards are sufficient, while others are questionable.
Not only are there ways and systems for distinguishing truth but also for distinguishing types of
knowledge. The terms a priori ("prior to") and a posteriori ("posterior to") are used in philosophy
(epistemology) to distinguish two types of knowledge, justifications or arguments. A priori knowledge or
justification is independent of experience (for example 'all bachelors are unmarried'); a posteriori
knowledge or justification is dependent on experience or empirical evidence (for example 'some
bachelors are very happy'). A priori justification makes reference to experience; but the issue concerns
how one knows the proposition or claim in question. What justifies or grounds one's belief in it? There
are many points of view on these two types of assertion, and their relationship is one of the oldest
problems in modern philosophy. There are certain laws in the universe that are known to be true
without room for change or justification.
Could the evil genius so arrange things that nothing is as I think it is? In the physical realm he
could. He could trick me into thinking that I have a body when I don’t, that things have shapes, colors
and so on that they really don’t. Descartes says that as difficult as it is to imagine he might even be able
to deceive me regarding certain innate, a priori ideas, so that maybe 6 +2 does not really equal 8 or
triangles don’t have three sides. If I can be tricked into thinking things exist that do not exist, and if I can
be fooled into thinking things do not exist when they really do, then maybe I am being deceived about
my own existence. Is there anything the evil genius cannot trick me about? Maybe I don’t really exist?3
This is when the famous “cogito” came into play. Meaning “I think, therefore I am”. In some ways, this
3
Archetypes of Wisdom: An Introduction to Philosophy; 259
Zollinger 4
Cartesian insight, more than anything else, marks the beginning of the modern worldview. Note the
difference between “Descartes thinks, therefore Descartes exists” and “I think, therefore I exist,” where
the “I” refers to whoever speaks or thinks the sentence. The cogito must be understood in the first
person. In that form, it meets Descartes’ conditions for being utterly unshakable. No rational person can
doubt his or her own existence as a conscious thinking entity, while being aware of thinking about
anything.4 Descartes wrote, “ I find here that thought is attribute that belongs to me; it cannot be
separated from me. I am, I exist, that is certain, but how often? I am not more than a thing which thinks,
that is to say a mind or soul, or an understanding, or a reason, which are terms whose significance was
formerly unknown to me. I am a real thing and really exist.”5 It is important to understand the
significance of this idea. The Cogito gives us a basis for existence; its one thing that we know exists for
sure. The evil genius may be able to trick us into thinking in false existences; but we know that we exist
because we think for ourselves, so therefore we are. This idea brings us to the problem of dualism, “The
view that knowing consists of two distinct aspects, the knower and the known.”6
Dualism generates one of the most tenacious of philosophical questions: What is the
relationship of the mind to the body? Yet so appealing is dualism to philosophers, preachers,
psychologists, and most of the rest of the world. Philosopher Gilbert Ryle refers to it as “the official
doctrine”. Ryle says: “The official doctrine, which hails chiefly from Descartes is something like this.
With the doubtful exceptions of idiots and infants in arms every human being has both a body and a
mind. Some would prefer to say that every human being is both a body and a mind. His body and his
mind are ordinarily harnessed together, but after the death of the body his mind may continue to exist
and function.”7
4
Archetypes of Wisdom: An Introduction to Philosophy; 260
Archetypes of Wisdom: An Introduction to Philosophy; 260
6
Archetypes of Wisdom: An Introduction to Philosophy; 563
7
Archetypes of Wisdom: An Introduction to Philosophy; 267
5
Zollinger 5
“Solipsism is sometimes expressed as the view that ‘I am the only mind which exists,’ or ‘My
mental states are the only mental states.’ However, the sole survivor of a nuclear holocaust might truly
come to believe in either of these propositions without thereby being a solipsist. Solipsism is therefore
more properly regarded as the doctrine that, in principle, ‘existence’ means for me my existence and
that of my mental states. Existence is everything that I experience — physical objects, other people,
events and processes — anything that would commonly be regarded as a constituent of the space and
time in which I coexist with others and is necessarily construed by me as part of the content of my
consciousness. For the solipsist, it is not merely the case that he believes that his thoughts, experiences,
and emotions are, as a matter of contingent fact, the only thoughts, experiences, and emotions. Rather,
the solipsist can attach no meaning to the supposition that there could be thoughts, experiences, and
emotions other than his own. In short, the true solipsist understands the word ‘pain,’ for example, to
mean ‘my pain.’ He cannot accordingly conceive how this word is to be applied in any sense other than
this exclusively egocentric one.”8 Now that he has established that at least one mind exists, Descartes
concludes his project by reestablishing knowledge of objective existence of the external world. “Nothing
further now remains but to inquire whether material things exist, and certainly I at least know that these
may exist, for there is no doubt that God possesses the power to produce everything that I am capable
of perceiving with distinctness.”9 While from the fact that we cannot conceive God without existence, it
follows that existence is inseparable from him and that he really exists, not that my thought can bring
this to pass.
Having established the existence of God to his satisfaction, Descartes believed he had clearly
and distinctly demonstrated the reliability of reason and the possibility of certain knowledge, since if
God is all knowing and all powerful, he would not let us live in constant ignorance. Descartes’ deep
8
9
Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy; pp1
Archetypes of Wisdom: An Introduction to Philosophy; 265
Zollinger 6
belief in God had a great influence on his philosophies; he believed that he had successfully proven that
God exists, something that he felt no one else had accomplished. Due to his revolutionary and forward
thinking is considered the first modern philosopher; he changed the way people had been thinking for
centuries.
Zollinger 7
Works Citied
Grayling, A. C. Descartes, The Life and Times of a Genius. First. 1. New York: Walker & Company, 2005.
Print.
Soccio, Douglas J. Archetypes of Wisdom. Seventh. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cenage Learning,
2010. Print.
Thorton, Steven P. "Solipsism and the Problem." Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Limerick, Ireland:
2004. Web. <http://www.iep.utm.edu/>.