PHILOSOPHICAL IMPLICATION OF DECARTES METHOD

-

PHILOSOPHICAL IMPLICATION OF DECARTES METHOD
The cogito ergo sum, “I think, therefore I exist” is at the heart of Rene Descartes philosophy in the Cartesian method. As mentioned above, Descartes sought out to doubt everything he had ever known. But why did he had to doubt? He felt and rightly observed that there could be deception of the senses, deception by a demon and of course deception that comes about from a state of dream. In this setting, true and certain knowledge was impossible, thus, he was led to a form of scepticism. But it dawned on him that while he was doubting everything, he was also thinking. He further observed that doubting is a function of thought, of the thinking faculty. But he wondered how one can think if one does not first exist. He therefore came to the conclusion that, doubt concerning his own existence was impossible because he needed to exist before he could even think and he needed to have the ability to think before he could doubt, consequently, that he thinks shows that he exists. Thus the only absolute certainty he was sure of, and on which he built his philosophy, was the cogito ergo sum, “I think, therefore, I am.” Every time Descartes asserts, ‘I am thinking,’ he must assert the “I” thus asserting the existence of the self who in doing the thinking.[1] Furthermore, the cogito became instrumental to prove his existence, that of other material things, and that of God. Descartes considered the cogito to be a “purely intellectual” truth, that is, one which is entirely conceptual, and a priori.[2]
The implications of this Descartes method, will be if he says I think therefore I am that will mean on the surface level that Rene Descartes is nothing but a thinking being, and what is the thinking faculty is the mind which means the Descartes is nothing more than his mind. So the I in "I AM" is not the Descartes you see but the faculty of thinking, which makes Descartes reduced a human person to the mind which is the thinking being not a knowing being.
More so, another implication will be that knowledge for Decartes comes from the intellect but not from the senses because senses experience never puts us in contact with object itself but only mental images, senses perception provides no certainty that there is anything in the external world that corresponds to the image we have in our mind. Thus can we truly know the independence of the sense.
Furthermore, Ethically one cannot be held responsible for his action, because human person can claim not been responsible for the action but the Mind. If you reduce a person to the mind the person can't be held responsible when the senses is in act.
Moreover, another implication will be that of body mind problem (dualism). If the person is in the mind and the mind is contain in the body, how will the body and the mind interact?
Finally for him saying he is dismissing all his knowledge, there is something he is not dismissing which is the fact of certitude that he is dismising everything.



[1] Cf. William F. Lawhead, The voyage of discovery- A historical introduction to philosophy (Belmont: Wadeworth/Thomson Learning Inc., 2002), p. 231-232.
[2] Cf. Spark Notes Editors, “Spark Note on René Descartes (1596–1650).” http://www.sparknotes.com/philosophy/descartes/ Accessed November 9, 2015

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

SUMMARY OF PROVIDENTISSIMUS DEUS, ENCYCLICAL LETTER OF POPE LEO XIII ON THE STUDY OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURE.

-
SUMMARY OF PROVIDENTISSIMUS DEUS, ENCYCLICAL LETTER OF POPE LEO XIII ON THE STUDY OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURE.      God has elevated man, freed him of guilt and ruin, restored him to his initial dignity and has made known to him the mystery of his divinity.      He revealed himself through the inspiration of the holyspirit to man. This supernatural revelation, the church believe, is contained in both written tradition and written books which is called sacred and canonical. God himself is the author of the sacred book, he composed the book; the words of the book are his words.      Priests are encouraged to read this sacred book, meditate over it, ponder on it and explain it to the people. The apostolic office also enjoins them to help in making this sacred book reach the Christians and also to defend it against the attack of the heretics.      The holy spirit himself testifies that all the scripture i...
Read more

summary and appraisal of chapters one, two and three of the book The African Origin of Greek Philosophy: An Exercise in Afrocentrism, by Innocent C. Onyewuenyi.

-
Introduction Can Africans philosophize? Is there such a thing as African philosophy? What contribution has Africans made on the world’s civilization and on the discipline of philosophy? These and a plethora of questions are seeking answers in today’s modern world. Africa is being conceived by the world as savages, primitive, her people as those that reside in the Dark Continent who are intellectually inferior. Thus, Africans have not contributed anything to the discipline of philosophy. Hence, this work by Innocent Onyewuenyi aims at answering these questions and at reinstating the truth that philosophy has its origin in the Egyptian Mystery System. In view of this, it is our aim in this paper to summarize and appraise chapters one, two and three of the book The African Origin of Greek Philosophy: An Exercise in Afrocentrism, by Innocent C. Onyewuenyi. To achieve this, we shall begin with a summary of the three chapters followed by an appraisal. Furthermore, we shall present ...
Read more

THE LAST THREE WAYS TO PROVES GOD'S EXISTENCE BY THOMAS AQUINAS

-
THE LAST THREE WAYS TO PROVES GOD'S EXISTENCE BY THOMAS AQUINAS FROM POSSIBILITY AND NECESSITY ITS ARGUEMENT In nature, we find things that are possible to be and not to be, that come from being and go out of being as contingent beings. Imagine every being is a contingent being, for each contingent being, there come a time it is not in existence, which makes it impossible for these to always be in existence. There could have been a time when nothing existed. At that time there would have been nothing to bring the currently existing contingent beings into existence. So therefore, nothing would be in existence now. We have reached a common sense result from assuming that every being is a contingent being. It implies that not every being is a contingent being, some being exists of its own necessity, and does not receive its existence from another being but rather causes them. This people term it as Supreme Being, God. ARGUMENT FROM DESIGN       ...
Read more