Rene Descartes Skepticism

Descartes’s mission in the meditations was to doubt everything and that what remained from his doubting could be considered the truth. This lead Descartes to argue for the existence of God. For the purpose of this paper, I will first discuss Descartes’s argument for the existence of God. I will then take issue with Descartes’s argument first with his view on formal reality and varying levels of reality, then with his argument that only God can cause the idea of God. I will then conclude with

There are three forms of doubts that Descartes believes in, one of which is the defective nature of doubt. The defective nature of doubt is reasonable because it gives Descartes a clean slate to begin doubting everything he’s uncertain of. Because Descartes wants knowledge and truth, he starts to look to doubt. To gain knowledge and truth one must have cautious perceptive that contains no doubt. Therefore, Descartes thinks that since the foundation of his knowledge had uncertain characteristics, he must take apart his knowledge and destroy everything he thought he knew. Then he starts to build his knowledge back up but only with things that he is certain of.

The one thing Descartes cannot doubt is that he exists, because he thinks and question the world around him. Descartes felt that our senses and perception of can skew every aspect of our understanding of reality, so only the fact that he exists is without doubt. This reasoning is known as solipsism (1). Basically, everything seen, felt, heard, or experienced are misrepresented by perception. With perception skewing everything, the only certainty is mind and the thoughts it holds, not necessarily that the thoughts are correct.

At the beginning of Meditation three, Descartes has made substantial progress towards defeating skepticism. Using his methods of Doubt and Analysis he has systematically examined all his beliefs and set aside those which he could call into doubt until he reached three beliefs which he could not possibly doubt. First, that the evil genius seeking to deceive him could not deceive him into thinking that he did not exist when in fact he did exist. Second, that his essence is to be a thinking thing. Third, the essence of matter is to be flexible, changeable and extended.

Discourse on Method and Meditations on First Philosophy was written by Rene Descarte. His main focus was to decide if God was real or not and if God created him or not. In Meditation Five, Descarte states that God existed because he has prior knowledge of materialistic things. He states that he recalls objects without prior knowledge of them, and that everyone perceives all the objects in the same type of manner. In the end of the mediation he closes it out by stating that, we all can think of non existent things with the same idea of what they are without them existing, thus proving that God exists in some manner, creating us with this information. In Meditation Five, Descarte focuses on proving God’s existence by considering the properties belonging to God 's essence. In this paper Descarte is trying to prove the existence of God through his pre existing knowledge of objects and ideas. He is wrong due to his examples being based on the big picture and not the small details that prove his ideas wrong.

In this paper, I offer a reconstruction of Descartes argument for God’s existence in the Third Meditation. Descartes tries to prove the existence of God with an argument that proceeds from the clear and distinct idea of an infinite being to the existence of himself. He believes that his clear and distinct idea of an infinite being with infinite “objective reality” leads to the occurrence of the “Special Causal Principle”. I will start by discussing and analyzing Descartes clear and distinct idea of an infinite being and how it the classification of ideas and the difference between formal and objective reality Special Causal Principle. Finally, I will examine the reasons Descartes offers for his belief in Gods existence and I will indicate the drawbacks within the proof. It will be concluded that Descartes arguments are inadequate and don’t clearly prove the existence of God.

Rene Descartes’ third meditation from his book Meditations on First Philosophy, examines Descartes’ arguments for the existence of God. The purpose of this essay will be to explore Descartes’ reasoning and proofs of God’s existence. In the third meditation, Descartes states two arguments attempting to prove God’s existence, the Trademark argument and the traditional Cosmological argument. Although his arguments are strong and relatively truthful, they do no prove the existence of God.

An approached by Rene Descartes Methodological doubt is skepticism in an approached that question the possibility of certain knowledge. Humans can only believe that they are awake, there is no way to distinguish if we are experiencing a dream or that we are awake. For example, if I see my friend playing basketball there is a lot of evidence that exist to indicate it is reality but there is also evidence to conclude that we are in a dream as well. We can use our senses which are; sight, hearing, smell, taste, and touch to determine what is real. Descartes believes that knowledge comes from our senses, so I can use my senses to determine that my friend is indeed playing basketball. My senses can also be fooled and have me think that my friend is not in fact playing basketball and it’s just a projection of my subconscious mind.

René Descartes was a skeptic, and thus he believed that in order for something to be considered a true piece of knowledge, that “knowledge must have a certain stability,” (Cottingham 21). In his work, Meditations on First Philosophy, Descartes concludes that in order to achieve this stability, he must start at the foundations for all of his opinions and find the basis of doubt in each of them. David Hume, however, holds a different position on skepticism in his work An Enquiry concerning Human Understanding, for he criticizes Descartes’ claim because “‘it is impossible,’” (qtd. in Cottingham 35). Both philosophers show distinct reasoning in what skepticism is and how it is useful in finding stability.

Descartes’ method offers definitive conclusions on certain topics, (his existence, the existence of God)but his reasoning is not without error. He uses three arguments to prove existence (His and God’s) that attempt to solidify his conclusions. 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. He is unable to achieve this ideal state of mind, however, and his proofs are shown to be faulty.

one must have at least a general idea of his motives in undertaking the argument.

Rene Descartes was a French philosopher and scientist. He is famous for his method of doubt which is he decided not believe things that are not sure or slightly doubted, he wished to believe things that cannot be doubted and he knew absolutely certain about these things. So the big goal for Descartes is to find one foundational belief and one can doubt that everyone who is skeptical about it will say that is a hundred percent true. And we start build knowledge on it. The motivation for Descartes' method was he found that people always disagree with each other.

His argument was an epistemological view which he showed in his work Meditations. This view questions the interpretation of what is real around you and how that knowledge is obtained. Descartes would doubt everything around him except for his own existence. He was certain that people should not rely on their senses; rather one should be in touch with his own mind, to discover truth and knowledge about the world. He felt that one could not assume about reality, even the most basic assumptions should be doubted.

Descartes used three arguments to make us doubt our own knowledge – the Dream argument, the Deceiving God argument, and the Evil Demon argument. In order to prove anything beyond a shadow of a doubt Descartes has to call everything into doubt. This way of thinking in philosophy is called skepticism, the practice of critically examining one’s own knowledge, and perception to determining whether they are true. Descartes rid all of his beliefs and started over with only certain beliefs, performing what he called “methodical doubt”.

This paper is intended to explain and evaluate Descartes' proof for the existence of god in Meditation Three. It shall show the weaknesses in the proof, but also give credit to the strengths in his proof. It will give a background of what Descartes has already accepted as what he truly knows. The paper will also state Descartes two major points for the existence of God and why the points can easily be proven false. The paper will also show that if a God does exist that God can in fact be an evil deceiver. The paper will also show that the idea of a perfect being cannot be conceived by an imperfect being.