Can One Perceive Or Confirm The Existence Of An Idea Or Object That Is External
To Him Mainly - God?
"I think therefore I am." Man wills, refuses, perceives, understands, and denies many principles. As explained by Rene' Descartes, man is a thinking thing, a conscious being who truthfully exists because he is certain that it is so. All that man perceives is internally present and not external to him or his mind. The focal point of the third meditation that must be dealt with is: Can one perceive or confirm the existence of an idea or object that is external to him mainly - God?
There are three ways, Descartes explains, that one may come to the conclusion of an objects existence. The first is through nature. The second is through feeling an object independent of one's will, for example; heat and cold.
The third, and most elaborated upon is the point of cause and effect, or more simply, the objective reality of an idea. We will primarily deal with the third reason of cause and effect.
Descartes brings some examples to demonstrate his cause and effect theory. More importantly, is the logic that lies behind the actual theory. The rationale that an object will have an effect is only if it stems from a legitimate cause. A stone, for example, cannot be perceived accurately if there isn't an initial idea preceding with equal or superior properties in one's intellect. The mind generates ideas and develops reality through previous schema or beliefs as Descartes states:
"And although an idea may give rise to another idea, this regress cannot, nevertheless, be infinite;we must in the end reach a first idea, the cause of which is, as it were, the archetype in which all the reality that is found objectively in these ideas is contained formally."
Additionally, properties such as color, sound, heat, and cold are too complex in their nature for Descartes to determine whether they are true or false. In other words, are the ideas that one has about a property true or false? Consequently, Descartes concludes that there is a common element between examples like the stone and the cold. The cold portraying the unreal or false object and the stone as a true object. He contends that they both contain
"substance" like man himself, and are therefore similar.
The only difficulty that arises is the consideration of God's existence.
There is no substance or idea for the notion of God to originate from. The valid question that Descartes asks is: Is it conceivable that a finite being have the idea of an infinite existence?
In his “Proof of an External World”, Moore puts forth several supported hypotheses in regards to the nature of the existence of things outside the self. Primarily, Moore discusses hands; his argument is that if he can produce two hands then it follows logically that two hands must exist. Furthermore, Moore puts forth the theory that if hands exist then this alone is proof of an external world. In opposition to Moore’s opinions will be found three main arguments: firstly that all of Moore’s evidence is based upon sensory input, secondly that the truth of one fact based on the truth of another fact forms an Epistemic Circle in this case, and finally that the evidence out forth by Moore, even if proved, does not necessarily prove the fact that he is attempting to prove.
Ideas are either innate (inborn or known from one's own nature), adventitious (come from outside me) or made by me.
Although the question regarding the existence of the inner sense remains, it is clear that the transparent epistemic rule allows for an individual to further understand their mental state, therefore supporting the idea of privileged access. Assuming that one is conscious of their state of mind, the logical rules allow inductive and deductive inferences to be made and can therefore help an individual determine what is true and not.
In this paper I will present an argument I have found in the Second Analogy for the necessity of presupposing the causal determination of each event. I will begin by briefly describing Robert Paul W...
...tween actual perception and the sensations produced within our minds. It is a fallacy of ignorance to assume that there is no existence outside of the mind because we have no way of perceiving it.
Meditation is an age-old practice that has renewed itself in many different cultures and times. Despite its age, however, there remains a mystery and some ambiguity as to what it is, or even how one performs it. The practice and tradition of meditation dates back thousands of years having appeared in many eastern traditions. Meditation’s ancient roots cloud its origins from being attributed to a sole inventor or religion, though Bon, Hindu, Shinto, Dao, and later, Buddhism are responsible for its development. Its practice has permeated almost all major world religions, but under different names. It has become a practice without borders, influencing millions with its tranquil and healing effects.
In “Proof of an External World,” Moore convincingly proves the existence of external objects by giving a simple example of holding up his hands and showing that it satisfies the three conditions of a rigorous, legitimate proof. He successfully combats potential criticisms from skeptics by attributing his knowledge that he is holding up his hands and saying “Here is my hand” (the premiss of his proof) to his faith, something
Descartes proof of the existence of God is derived from his establishment that something cannot come from nothing. Because God is a perfect being, the idea of God can be found from exploring the different notions of ideas. Descartes uses negation to come to the conclusion that ideas do not come from the world or imagination; because the world contains material objects, perfection does not exist.
... So following all of this, if the 'sensible objects' that we perceive are of the mind, then we can not claim that there is an external world (class, lecture) (James, 2).
term exactly the same way. Descartes definition of idea is “whatever is immediately perceived by the mind”. Both these philosophers believe in the existence of God...
The next form of causation is the material cause; this cause also focuses on the present. Material cause is based on Aristotle’s matter and the principle of individuation. This cause is synonymous to what literally appears substance wise. For example, Vogue magazine literally consist of picture, paper, and ink. When you see an average television, it is made up of plastic, glass, and/or metal substances. The house that someone might live in ...
Perception is the process by which we grasp useful information about the external world through the senses. Armstrong argues in ‘Perception and Belief’ that perceptual experience is a disposition to form beliefs about the real world. The argument from illusion shows that perceptual knowledge is a misrepresentation of the world because external objects may have qualities they do not really possess. This is due to various experiences that are caused by hallucinations or by the influence of drugs. Given that reality can easily be altered by such cases, perception does not seem to represent a direct window onto the world.
Learners have shown that the acquisition of knowledge is a two-input contribution were an individual must strive to make sense of fresh information by actively implementing prior knowledge to be able to understand a new subject. The reason why no certainty can be entirely drawn from imagination or intuition is because both ways of knowing base off their processing of information in the same way; with the help of previous knowledge the mind has already acquired somewhere else. Therefore ideas and thoughts that claim to be born out of imagination and intuition turn out to be a mere hybrid interpretation of previously processed ideas. Intuition and imagination provide juxtaposition because even though they're supposed to be ideals defined by creativity
One of the most remarkable things about human existence is that there is a subject, an “I”, that experiences intellectual cognition of external things and is able to reflect on these experiences as a cognitive act in itself. How do things that exist outside of my mind come to exist inside of my mind so as to enable me to understand them? The goal of any theory of mind should be to answer questions such as this and, in evaluating the Gettier Problem as objectively as possible, we shall attempt to solve it to see whether it can withstand the single most piercing question we can ask of it: is it true that they are inescapable? In this essay I shall examine the paper of Gettier to answer the question of whether or not man can arrive at knowledge and, if so, how? I shall do this by recounting the problems posed by Gettier to the traditional understanding of knowledge as 'justified true belief', and then present critical responses to it to get to the truth of whether Gettier problems are inescapable, most notably by attempting to answer it with the 'Causal Theory', the 'Defeasibility Theory', and finally by considering knowledge as 'true belief with sufficient warrant'.
The knowledge that individuals make reference in the sphere of everyday life is dominated by a kind of thinking ( natural attitude ) capable of suspending the doubt that this reality is something different from what you see .