Thursday, October 15, 2009
When the Walls Come Down . . .
Descartes realizes that some of the beliefs he thought were true turned out to be false. In the pursuit of knowledge he seeks to tear down his previous beliefs and build them up again upon a firm foundation. In other words, he is engaged in a foundational project, searching for a class of beliefs that themselves are not in need of justification in order to justify his other beliefs. But is this quest a misguided one? Do such beliefs exist? If not, does that mean that knowledge is impossible? Or is there some other way to justify our beliefs?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I think through the Meditations, Descartes does manage to find some true foundational beliefs, most notably the "I think therefore I am" discovery. However, I don't think he is very successful on building off of this basis. Most of his later proofs, such as the existence of god, are plagued by jumps in logic and circular reasoning. Is he a failure? I don't think so because this is a very difficult endeavor. I beleive that there is a reason that the beliefs he tries to prove aren't foundational, that is because they are very difficult to verify. That said, I think some knowlege can be proved via this measure, but not as much as Descartes hopes.
ReplyDeletePiggybacking off of Mike Gwin, I feel Descartes proof of God is weak at best. Descartes relies on the idea that he has a concept of perfection. Because this idea of perception is, according to Descartes, is the most real idea he has, God must exist. The link he makes here is that he because he perceives God as being real he must be real since Descartes could not perceive God without his existence. The only things that distinguishes God from an illusion is the idea that God is the source of all of Descartes knowledge. This claim, in my opinion, is warrantless.
ReplyDeleteSo does Descartes fail? In an immediate sense perhaps. Descartes manages to establish a few legitimate foundational beliefs (as GWIN was getting at). Where Descartes succeeds is getting other philosophers to discuss and build upon his ideas.
The attempts that Descartes makes to prove that knowledge exists can be seen as flawed in several ways. The first conclusion of “cogito ergo sum”, I think, therefore I am”, is the only piece of knowledge that I believe is true. The concept that he has a mind and a thought process definitely proves that he is a thing. Descartes other truth of there being a God that is good, in my eyes, has much doubt. Agreeing with Evan that just having a mere perception of God makes him real is ludicrous because how does ones perception make something true. Then the idea that God is good and would never want to deceive is very unreliable because all people think of God differently and it is based upon Descartes beliefs not a truth.
ReplyDeleteI think that knowledge is impossible because there is no agreement of what it is or how to obtain it.