Descartes’ Philosophy Essay

Rene Descartes is one of the near suck up-cut rationalists of the modern period who boldly claim that knowledge can be achieved through ground. He suggested that in the pursuit of knowledge one should be fit to distinguish that which is true and that which is non true. This opens the idea towards his criticisms against experience as a source of knowledge.Experience, as Descartes puts it, cannot be trusted to produce unquestionable knowledge because experience can deceive a somebody (Heyward & Jones). It is a fact that experience comes from the external environment derived by the sensory organs (e.g. eyes, ears, nose, skin, and tongue). These sensory organs ar deceptive in much(prenominal) a carriage that it can generate ideas that argon not really alive or happening. Because of this fallibility of experience, Descartes argues that it cannot grow at true knowledge.In effect, Descartes suggests that in rescript to obtain genuine knowledge, one should suspend his sentime nt on things that he or she perceives unless those things are proven to be certain and indubitable. With this method he called his pursuit of knowledge as the method actingic Doubt (Heyward & Jones).Discourse on MethodIn his Discourse on Method, he gives four uprightnesss which guide the person from pursuing the genuine knowledge (Heyward & Jones). The first law states that one should not admit anything as true that is not clearly and lucidly grasp by reason. As he claims, truthfulness of an idea is based on its the clarity which is examined by reason. Reason tells which ideas are clear and generated by distinct intuitions. Having this law, he proceeds to the second and thirdly laws.The second law suggests that because the sound judgment can absorb complex ideas, these complex ideas should be able to transform to simple ideas that can be intuitively analyzed by reason. This emphasizes that simple ideas are the only ideas that reason can recognize much(prenominal) that complex i deas should be breakdown to simpler ideas in order for the reason to learn it clearly and distinctly.While the second law appears to be the analysis of the ideas, the third law is the synthesis of the ideas which attempts to figure out the connection and relationship among unlike ideas that are presented in the mind. This synthesis enables the mind to sort out ideas, and airlift them to arrive at conclusions, generalizations and judgments.The fourth and the final law suggests that the use of generalization and deduction assures the achievement of knowledge since the ideas derived through induction and deduction are clearly and distinctly acknowledge by reason (being correspond in simple ideas).Method of DoubtThe discussion on the laws given in a higher place is essential in discussing Descartes Method of Doubt. As emphasized by the laws, ideas in order to serve as knowledge should be strongly recognized by reason in a sense that the reason cannot deny them at all. Hence, his Method of Doubt functions so as to arrive at certainty that which cannot be doubted or denied by reason (Heyward & Jones). His method is various from the method used by the skeptics in such a way that the latter suspends their judgments only for the sake of doubt while the former suspends judgment for the achievement of certitude.As mentioned earlier, one should come up with a starting line point which can be clearly recognized by reason and that which cannot be doubted. Descartes arrives at a conclusion that the thing that cannot be doubted by reason is the fact that one cannot doubt his existence. This is for the reason that if one is on the stage of doubting, it is certainly that he is thinking, and that thinking implies that on that point is something or person who or which does the act of thinking. Hence, the thinking-thing exists. And that thinking-thing is, as Descartes put sit, I. Therefore, that which cannot be doubted is the fact that a thinking-thing exists (I think therefore I am existing) (Heyward & Jones).On Gods ExistenceAs Descartes recognizes that one can be deceived by experience, such implies that there is true and false belief. This false beliefs which come into the mind as ideas are not caused by God for Descartes. For him, God is the most better entity that which cannot be doubted and that which cannot cause doubt. Hence, God is that which is certain and that which causes certainty that is why he cannot inflict deception (Still). The existence of simple, clear, and distinct ideas is the manifestation of the existence of the most ideal being that which is out-and-out(a) and certain that is God. Therefore, God exists (He causes the most clear and distinct simple ideas which make up the certainty of things and ideas).Furthermore, Descartes advocates the idea that there are innate ideas. These innate ideas are not cause by the thinking-thing which is first established by him as that which cannot be doubted anymore. And those ideas hav e neutral reality which is not influenced and caused by the thinking-thing it appears then that there is actually some other thing that certainly exists which caused the ideas absorbed by the thinking thing. And this thing that which exists foregoing to my existence is something which is absolute and the most certain of all certain things and ideas. As Descartes puts it, it is God.Another way of proving Gods existence is the idea of perfect and less perfect. As the thinking-thing is obligated to doubt so as to arrive at genuine knowledge, it implies that he is exposed to deception caused by the fallibility of the experience. And since the thinking-thing cannot fare all things with certainty it follows then that his power is limited. But the concept of matinee idol implies certain and absolute attributes (Still). As the thinking-thing recognizes the concept of perfection and his being an subordinate and thus imperfect being, he concludes that there is something which is superio r and that which is perfect, certain and absolute that is God.Evaluation of Descartes Arguments on KnowledgeDescartes is veracious in saying that the mind can only and intuitively recognize simple ideas that are represented in the mind with perfect clarity and distinctiveness. He is also correct in saying that our sense perception can be deceived (e.g. oculus illusions, the bending of the pen when submerged in water, etc.). And finally, he has a commodity point in saying that the foundation or the most sound thing or idea that is indubitable or cannot be doubted is the fact that the thinking-thing exists which does the doubting. However, his account on the existence of God and the innate ideas that he advocates are questionable in a way that they leave controversy and uncertainty.He equated the thing that causes the simple, clear and distinct ideas to God as well as the bearer of the attribute of being perfect. Being perfect, God is not caused by anything other than himself. Bu t the mind is in fact the creator of such entity. If God is perfect how can be that he is not tangible or perceptible to us? It is not enough to say that we are imperfect that is why we cannot perceive him. How can it happen that something which is perfect does not have a corporeal body, which the imperfect entities have? As a perfect being he should possess all the qualities that even the unblemished imperfect entities have.Works CitedHeyward, Jeremy and Jones, Gerald. Meditations Rene Descartes. Hodder Murray, 2005.Still, James. Descartes Meditations Ontological Argument. 30 November 2005. Internet Infidels. 08 November 2007