The Strengths And Weaknesses Of Descartes ' Dreaming Argument And Evil Demon Argument

The topic of this essay is Descartes’ First Meditations and I will be discussing in detail the Dreaming argument and the Evil Demon argument.

The last step in Descartes argument says if he cannot tell whether he is dreaming, then how can he trust any of his senses telling him about the environment? To know anything about the external world on the basis of his sensory experiences, it seems like

While it can be said that premise 1 is true, many people disagree strongly with premise 2. Descartes claims that we cannot be certain that we are not dreaming, but our dreaming experiences and our waking experiences are dissimilar. Our dreams often do not make sense and do not fit into a consistent and comprehensible timeline of events unlike our waking experiences. Even in circumstances where dreams are vivid and seem real for a short period of time, we are able to recall these dreams and acknowledge that they were not real life events. On the other hand, this view can be challenged by recognising we appear to be awake when we think about our dreams, but Descartes objective is to make the reader consider if it is possible that even the process of waking and reflecting upon a dream is part of the dream itself, thus reinforcing the idea that we are unable to differentiate between dreaming and being awake. The final limitation of this argument that I would like to discuss within this essay is its paradoxical nature. Although the premises of this argument appear reasonable, the conclusion seems ridiculous. While the conclusion does follow from the premises, creating a valid argument, the conclusion remains arguably unacceptable.

One of Rene Descartes’s most famous arguments, from his not only from his first meditation but all of the meditations, is his Dream Argument. Descartes believes that there is no way to be able to distinguish being in awake from being in a state of dreaming. In fact you could actually be in a dream right now. Rene Descartes’s theory that one is unable distinguish being awake from dreaming, as interesting as it is, can be at times a little farfetched, along with a few contradictions to himself, Descartes’s dream argument does not entitle himself to any sort of claim.

In this section I will thoroughly discuss and explore both of Descartes arguments. Firstly, scepticism is the doubting of knowledge or the doubting of a belief. Descartes holds the view that to know something or attain a certain belief for example God is omnibenevolent, I must know that God is omnibenevolent, believe that God is omnibenevolent and have reasoning/evidence that God is omnibenevolent. I think Descartes definition of knowledge is logical because again using the example God is omnibenevolent, I can’t know that God is omnibenevolent if I don’t believe that it is true and if I have no justification or reasoning for believing that God is omnibenevolent then I can’t possibly be certain that He is omnibenevolent. Descartes believes without knowing, believing and having reasoning/evidence, I cannot know that God is real. Descartes argues that “it is prudent never to trust completely those who have deceived us even once” . Descartes argues that you cannot trust someone or something which has made you believe or accept a false truth. For example, in Descartes 6th Meditation he writes “sometimes towers which had looked round from a distance appeared square from close up; and enormous statues standing on their pediments did not seem large when observed from the ground”. This indicates that it is very easy to be deceived by someone or something which results in someone believing a false truth therefore I agree with Descartes that you cannot trust something which has deceived you more than once. Furthermore, looking at Descartes dreaming argument, the dreaming argument is an argument which infers when you are asleep, you can have dreams which do not allow you to distinguish whether you are asleep or awake. Dreams very often lead the dreamer to believing false situations which does not enable to dreamer to know they are asleep. The dreaming argument is about if you should trust

Rene Descartes argues that a rational method is required to have knowledge. Descartes wants to determine which, if any beliefs, he has that are certain must be true! He employs a method of doubt whereby he hopes to find at least one foundational belief. The Evil Demon suggests that all of one’s experiences might be the result of a powerful outside force, a “Malicious demon”. Descartes had 3 types of beliefs: Beliefs about the world- Optical illusions, Beliefs about self- Dreaming and Beliefs about Math/Science- Evil Demon. He employs a method of doubt whereby he arrives at his one foundational belief. The evil demon can trick you into belief. According to Descartes a being cannot have knowledge of a being higher of the scale, unless the higher being imparts that knowledge to him. His limited intellect could never hope to comprehend God unless God imparted the Knowledge. Since Descartes has a clear and distinct notion of God, God must exist. Since God exists and all is good, all of Descartes previous doubts were washed away. God would not allow an evil being to deceive us.

This essay will take a look at Descartes Dreaming argument and Evil Demon argument. As well as discussing their weaknesses and strengths to later decide which argument is the best. Despite my belief of subjective truths, the reason for doing this is to establish both arguments on an equal basis and to determine which would be best in an argument.

In this essay I will attempt to show that the philosopher, Renè Descartes’ Cogito Argument successfully proves the Evil Demon Argument to be unsound. By an analysis of the structure of the arguments and what they prove, I will show the evil demon argument to be unsound. An argument is unsound when the premises as false and the argument is invalid. This analysis of both structure and content will eventuate in objections on the aforementioned categories. To take any of Descartes’ arguments in consideration I have to understand why he started his meditations in order to prove Gods’ existence and to gain clear and distinct knowledge. At the same time of his first meditation he was engaged in a raging war within Europe and lost some his close family members (Smith, K., 2014), he too was at risk of death – all because of certain religious beliefs. It is easy to understand that he wrote all of his meditations in order for himself to be sure of dying for what he believed in.

The Dream Argument of Rene Descartes is a philosophical skeptical argument used by Descartes himself to put into doubt the existence of any knowledge he has gained from his sense. There have been many interpretations of Descartes’ Dream Argument by different philosophers, and one notable example is that of Barry Stroud’s example. Stroud, in his Problem of the External World, describes the Dream Argument as an argument where “we must know we are dreaming if we are to know anything about the world around us” (Stroud 30). This reading by Stroud describes the Dream Argument as an altered form of an argument from ignorance, which would have a general formulation as such:

Descartes states in order to find the truth, we must be able to clearly and distinctly perceive something to be true, we must prove two things. First, proving that the existence of God is true. Second, the fact that God is not a deceiver tricking Descartes into perceiving something to be true when in reality it is false. These two steps are neccesary for first, only by the fact that we know God is not a evil-deceiving demon, can we rule out the possibiltiy that Descartes's perception is not influenced by an evil demon. Second, without the prove that God is in existence, Descartes has a possibility of being possessed by an evil demon, which in turn, causes him to go back to square one of only recognizing that he exists. Only when the existence

Descartes’ dream argument establishes itself based on the premise that I cannot distinguish between my most clear and evident perceptions and vivid dreams. He begins this argument by pointing out how our main source of belief, our senses, can be deceptive. Descartes flirts with the idea that possibly his senses are deceiving because he is insane.

In the dream argument Descartes’ thinks that sometimes while he is dreaming, he falsely thinks that he is awake. After he reflects on this, Descartes thinks that he can’t ever tell if he is dreaming or not. He then shares the idea that maybe it is all just a dream. Although some beliefs we form in our dreams are false, the material for our dreams comes from things we experience while awake. Descartes points out that no matter how much it may seem you are awake; it is also possible for you to have that same experience while dreaming. His ideas about dreaming give him reason to doubt all of his sensory beliefs. In the last part of his argument he states that if he cannot tell whether or not he is dreaming, then how can he trust anything his senses

The dream argument claims that the act of dreaming provides an intuitive evidence that cannot be distinguished from those that our senses give us when we are in the waking state, and for this reason, we cannot give full credit to the senses we use to distinguish reality from illusion. Consequently, any experience from our senses should at least be considered carefully and rigorously tested to determine if it really refers to reality. In this essay, I will argue that Descartes’s Dream Argument proves that we cannot gain knowledge through the senses because senses are often deceiving and cannot be fully trusted. Our senses are our primary way of interacting with the world, they give us a raw information about what is present

He finds it plausible that we are all living in a dream and we have never experienced reality. He can no longer give any credence to his senses and finds himself in a place of complete uncertainty. Descartes comes to the conclusion that nothing can be perceived more easily and more evidently than his own mind. He has discovered that even bodies are not accurately perceived by the senses or the faculty of imagination, and are only accurately being perceived by the intellect. He also realizes that they are not distinguished through being touched, smelled, or tasted, but by being understood alone. (An apple is an apple because our mind tells us that it is an apple.) It is the faculty of reason that gives the knowledge and lets the mind know the truths and essences of objects. Descartes assumes that all of us can be decided by our senses, someone can see something far away, and then discover that is not what we thought it was. Or even a oar when is immerse half in water attempt to be bent, but instead is straight. Descartes think that we cannot always be sure of what we sense, and gives the example of himself seated by the fire.

This argument is based in the uncertainty of knowledge. Descartes argues that we cannot be certain of the physical impressions upon our minds because the world can potentially deceive the mind, leaving it with false impressions. Due to the fact that our minds can conceive of a reality in which we are dreaming or some nefarious force is