Who Is Descartes's Dreaming Argument?

In “Bad Dreams, Evil Demons, and the Experience Machine: Philosophy and The Matrix”, Christopher Grau analyzes Rene Descartes argument concerning reality. The argument starts on page 181 in the bottom left hand corner of the page and continues onto page 182, ending at the bottom right corner of the page. In this text, Grau explains Descartes argument that what one may interpret as reality may not be more than a figment of their imagination and then uses it to develop his own argument. Grau explains that you cannot know whether you are in the dream world or the real world, and therefore argues that we cannot be sure that our beliefs about the world are true.

It is important to address these types of questions through analysis of his dream argument in his Discourse on Method. It is also significant to consider and incorporate the critiques of other philosophers, such as Barry Stroud, who have examined the Cartesian argument for skepticism about the world in which we live. It is evident, in stumbling upon many reviews and critiques concerning Descartes’ dream argument, that there is current scholarly interest in his breakthrough modern

In the First Meditation, Descartes gives us the Evil Demon Hypothesis which serves to give him reason to doubt the existence of everything he perceives and believes. He describes a ‘malicious demon of the utmost power and cunning’ that has the sole purpose of deceiving Descartes (Descartes, 2010: 17). I will argue that his hypothesis has proven to be a strong one because only the cogito provides a way for us to frustrate or trick the evil demon.

In the First Meditation, Descartes gives us the Evil Demon Hypothesis which serves to give him reason to doubt the existence of everything he perceives and believes. He describes a ‘malicious demon of the utmost power and cunning’ that has the sole purpose of deceiving Descartes (Descartes, 2010: 17). I will argue that his hypothesis has proven to be a strong one because only the cogito provides a way for us to frustrate or trick the evil demon.

To expand on his first argument, Descartes' deceiving God argument states that our deceptions are caused by an all powerful God. Humans are capable of being deceived because we are imperfect, unlike God, who is essential flawless. If we can agree on the definition of God, an all powerful and omnipotent being who created us, then we can argue that he has the power to deceive even our most reliable senses. Descartes expresses his compounding doubts as "How do I know that he did not bring it about that there is no earth at all, no heavens, no extended thing, no shape, no size, no place, and yet bringing it about that all these things appear to me to exist precisely as they do now?" (Descartes 491). This excerpt

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

To know anything about the external world on the basis or your sensory experiences, you have to know that you are not dreaming.

Descartes’ Evil Demon argument is the idea that instead of his God deceiving him- because he is too good to do so – that perhaps there is an evil being of a similar power to God who is in fact deceiving him to believe falsehoods as fact (Reason and Responsibility, Feinberg and Shafer-Landau, 2015, 242-244). The premises for this go like 1. If I am to be certain of anything I need to be certain I am not being deceived by a powerful evil demon, 2. I cannot be certain I am not being deceived by a powerful evil demon, therefore 3. I cannot be certain of anything. This is harder to argue against because there is no evidence for an evil demon existing- however this does not stop Descartes from believing in God. This is a valid argument because the premises do follow on from each other however, it is not a sound argument because premise 2 is

Descartes organised his ideas on knowledge and skepticism to establish two main arguments, the dreaming argument and the evil demon argument. The dreaming argument suggests that it is not possible to distinguish between having a waking experience and dreaming an experience. Whereas, the evil demon argument suggests that we are deceived in all areas of our experiences by an evil demon. This essay will investigate the validity of the arguments and to what extent the conclusion of these arguments is true. The soundness and the extent to which the premises are true will also be explored. After evaluating these arguments it will be concluded that the dreaming argument is valid, but is not sound. Whereas, the evil demon argument is both valid and sound.

In the fifth and last skeptical hypothesis, Descartes raises the possibility of there being an evil demon that deceives him into believing falsehoods. Descartes has established arguments that either support or demolish the thoughts for all of these skeptical hypotheses. As stated previously, the dream argument points out that people may actually be dreaming when they think they are living in reality. Descartes used his methods of detecting falsities to evaluate this argument.

It is deception from the sense that causes this mistrust for Descartes and brings forth the Dream Argument. The human senses as well feel very real, just as they do in reality, and this is one of the first things that have Descartes question the differences between being awake and dream. Due to the trust issues it he becomes unsure of whether he is dreaming or not. When it comes to dreaming Descartes thinks that there could possibility that some certain God that may have easily deceived him in falsely believing in things could appear to be correct but are not. However Descartes says that it God is described as a supremely good being (Descartes, 21). God has always been a being that is worshiped and why would so many people worship an evil God if he brings no positives to their lives. Descartes however is not 100 percent positive on whether God is being deceptive or not being deceptive. James Hill says that “[the] key move that Descartes then makes is to highlight the lack of insight one has into one’s condition when dreaming. It is this lack of insight, and Descartes’ way of interpreting it, which forms the backbone of the dreaming argument” (Hill, 2). To shorten that down, the minimal explanations to why and how dreams occur is the foundation for Descartes’s Dream Argument.

Pyrrhonian skeptics and Descartes’s response to skepticism are two interesting reads that make one curious. Pyrrhonian skepticism has a goal which is the suspension of judgment and tranquility, while Descartes brings reason and doubt to the senses about what one perceives and feels. This essay will inform about the Pyrrhonian skeptic and the response Decartes has to the skeptic views.

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.

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.

The Cartesian method of doubt is a process in which one systematically considers all things purported to be true and attempts to find a scenario in which they may be untrue. In Descartes’ own words, the purpose of this method is “to demolish everything completely and start again right from the foundations” . Indeed, by annihilating all which may be considered untrue, Descartes wishes to reconstruct reality based only principles which are unconditionally true. I believe that Descartes is correct in his methodology and successful in his attempts to demolish everything dubitable and start again from the foundations. In support to Descartes’ method of doubt, I will consider the dreaming argument. In opposition to Descartes’ method of doubt,