Comparing Descartes and Peirce's Opinions On Knowledge

990 Words2 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: The third meditations of descartes

Knowledge according to Merriam- Webster’s dictionary is “acts, information, and skills acquired by a person through experience or education.” Rene Descartes saw knowledge being attained through deductive logic and would disagree with this definition. Charles Peirce’s pragmatic approach on the other hand is the reason we have that definition. Rene Descartes believed that by ridding himself of all prejudice & prejudgments and doubting everything including his senses, body, and all his previous experiences based on a mathematical approach was how humans can know about the natural world. Rather than going out into the world to find knowledge, Descartes wants us to think and go deeper within ourselves. He states, “It is only once we have denied all falsehoods resulting from the outside world that we can begin a new structure of logic based strictly on definite truths. In order for our foundation to be firm, we must find a point which is certain and this point is within ourselves.” (Design) Descartes wants us to question everything, except God, because knowledge we gain from others is not certain since we did not acquire it firsthand. Descartes argued we can trust God, because God gives us clear and distinct ideas and since God can be trusted, then so can these thoughts. Therefore, God must exist for this to be true. Descartes believes God exists because he is perfect and if he were not perfect then he would not exist. In short, Descartes thought that doubt will move the inquirer toward the elimination of error and, accordingly, certainty will be given to knowledge. Charles Peirce believed “only through the way of linguistic, logical and pragmatic signs considered as tools and objects can humans know about the natural world.” (Kremer... ... middle of paper ... ...n for his thinking. Peirce wants his thoughts to make sense on their own, without having to be applicable in all cases. Peirce is concerned with what is practical, not the theoretical, because what is theoretical is not real to Peirce.” (Design) In conclusion, neither view on knowledge is improbable. Both philosophers believed that doubt and belief played a role in how we attain knowledge, the only difference being that whereas Descartes was looking for absolute certainty, Peirce saw it as is impossible, because there are only beliefs. We can never know absolutely what truth is, but we can believe something is true once we stop doubting it. I feel we see more of Peirce's ideas today because they do not need a foundation to be successful, whereas an atheist for example would have some problems with Descartes theories because they are based on the existence of God.

Show More
Related

  • Analysis Of Charles Sanders Pierce's Fixation Of Belief

    631 Words  | 2 Pages

    The first method of Peirce fixing beliefs is the method of tenacity, the role of this method play how simply or directly the person's believe their own view and never stray from their system of beliefs, they will forever be satisfied thus acquiring a great peace of mind. For example, if a person already believes that she/he thinks is that yes it is true. On the other hand, if it's something a person does not already believe that she/he thinks it is no that is not true. Moreover, this is a very simple method for deciding what to believe and doesn't require much thinking, Peirce says, so it's pretty handy.

    Read More

  • Comparing Descartes' Meditations on First Philosophy and Plato's The Republic

    1499 Words  | 3 Pages

    In Meditations, Descartes brings doubt to everything he believes because it is human nature to believe that which is false. He states that most of what he believes comes from the senses and that a lot of times those senses can be deceived. His conclusion of doubting everything is based on his example of a basket of apples. It goes as follows; you have a basket of apples but you fear that some apples have gone bad and you don't want them to rot the others, so you throw all the apples out of the basket. Now that the basket is empty you examine each apple carefully and return the good apples to the basket. This is what he does with his beliefs, he follows and keeps only those beliefs of which he is sure of. Our beliefs as a whole must be discarded and then each individual belief must be looked at carefully before we can accept it. We must only accept those beliefs we feel are good.

    Read More

  • An Examination of the Second Meditation of Descartes

    1585 Words  | 4 Pages

    Baird and Kaufmann, the editors of our text, explain in their outline of Descartes' epistemology that the method by which the thinker carried out his philosophical work involved first discovering and being sure of a certainty, and then, from that certainty, reasoning what else it meant one could be sure of. He would admit nothing without being absolutely satisfied on his own (i.e., without being told so by others) that it was incontrovertible truth. This system was unique, according to the editors, in part because Descartes was not afraid to face doubt. Despite the fact that it was precisely doubt of which he was endeavoring to rid himself, he nonetheless allowed it the full reign it deserved and demanded over his intellectual labors. "Although uncertainty and doubt were the enemies," say Baird and Kaufmann (p.16), "Descartes hit upon the idea of using doubt as a tool or as a weapon. . . . He would use doubt as an acid to pour over every 'truth' to see if there was anything that could not be dissolved . . . ." This test, they explain, resulted for Descartes in the conclusion that, if he doubted everything in the world there was to doubt, it was still then certain that he was doubting; further, that in order to doubt, he had to exist. His own existence, therefore, was the first truth he could admit to with certainty, and it became the basis for the remainder of his epistemology.

    Read More

  • The Cartesian Circle is Wrong

    1602 Words  | 4 Pages

    Rene Descartes meditations on the existence of God are very profound, thought-provoking, and engaging. From the meditations focused specifically on the existence of God, Descartes uses the argument that based on his clear and distinct perception that cannot be treated with doubt, God does exist. In the beginning of the third meditation, Descartes proclaims that he is certain he is a thinking thing based on his clear and distinct perception, and he couldn’t be certain unless all clear and distinct perceptions are true. Before diving into the existence of God, Descartes introduces smaller arguments to prove the existence of God. For example, Descartes introduces in his argument that there are ideas in which he possess that exists outside of him. Utilizing the objective versus formal reality, Descartes states “If the objective reality of any of my ideas turns out to be so great that I am sure the same reality does not reside in me, either formally or eminently, and hence that I myself cannot be its cause, it will necessarily follow that I am not alone in the world, but that some other thing which is the cause of this idea exists” (29). In other words, the ideas of objective reality that resides in Descartes can potentially only come from a supreme being, which is God; God possess more objective reality than he does formal reality. We as humans, as Descartes states, are finite substance, and God is the only infinite substance. The only way for us as a finite substance to think of an infinite substance is possible if, and only if, there is an infinite substance that grants us the idea of substance in first place. After these smaller arguments, Descartes states that while we can doubt the existence of many things, due to the fact that ...

    Read More

  • Meditation By Rene Descartes

    1373 Words  | 3 Pages

    Rene Descartes’ greatest work, Meditations on First Philosophy, attempts to build the base of knowledge through a skeptical point of view. In the First Meditation, Descartes argues that his knowledge has been built on reason and his senses, yet how does he know that those concepts are not deceiving him? He begins to doubt that his body exists, and compares himself to an insane person. What if he is delusional about his social ranking, or confused about the color of his clothes, or even unaware of the material that his head is made of? This is all because the senses are deceiving, even in our dreams we experience realistic visions and feelings. Finally, Descartes comes to the conclusion that everything must be doubted, and begins to build his

    Read More

  • Descartes Meditation 1 Analysis

    958 Words  | 2 Pages

    In his work, Meditations on First Philosophy, Descartes narrates the search for certainty in order to recreate all knowledge. He begins with “radical doubt.” He asks a simple question “Is there any one thing of which we can be absolutely certain?” that provides the main question of his analysis. Proceeding forward, he states that the ground of his foundation is the self – evident knowledge of the “thinking thing,” which he himself is.

    Read More

  • Descartes Beliefs

    1005 Words  | 3 Pages

    In Descartes’ first meditations, he begins by saying that he will start over and basically question everything he knows. In order for Descartes to question everything he says that he must first establish a foundation that is built on the absolute truth; therefore he will reset or start over with his beliefs because there is a possibility that what he already knows is not the absolute truth. Descartes says that because he has doubts on the things that he believes, then his beliefs might not be the absolute truth. Everything that he knows is based on the senses and how he sees the world. He says that he cannot trust his senses because there is the possibility that everything that he experiences is just an illusion created by a powerful being. He concludes the first meditation by saying that because his reality is perceived by the senses and that there is a possibility of illusion, he cannot be really certain of what things are and are not.

    Read More

  • Rene Descartes' Meditations on First Philosophy

    1961 Words  | 4 Pages

    At the start of the meditation, Descartes begins by rejecting all his beliefs, so that he would not be deceived by any misconceptions from reaching the truth. Descartes acknowledges himself as, “a thing that thinks: that is, a thing that doubts, affirms, denies, understands a few things, is ignorant of many things” He is certain that that he thinks and exists because his knowledge and ideas are both ‘clear and distinct’. Descartes proposes a general rule, “that whatever one perceives very clearly and very distinctly is true” Descartes discovers, “that he can doubt what he clearly and distinctly perceives is true led to the realization that his first immediate priority should be to remove the doubt” because, “no organized body of knowledge is possible unless the doubt is removed” The best probable way to remove the doubt is prove that God exists, that he is not a deceiver and “will always guarantee that any clear and distinct ideas that enter our minds will be true.” Descartes must remove the threat of an invisible demon that inserts ideas and doubts into our minds to fool us , in order to rely on his ‘clear and distinct’ rule.

    Read More

  • Descartes Proof Of God

    1660 Words  | 4 Pages

    Descartes thinks that we have a very clear and distinct idea of God. He thinks God must exist and Descartes himself must exist. It is a very different way of thinking shown from the six meditations. Descartes uses ideas, experiments, and “proofs” to try and prove God’s existence.

    Read More

  • Descartes - Meditations

    1633 Words  | 4 Pages

    In Descartes’ first meditation, he goes on to prove that nothing exists. He establishes that knowledge is built upon a foundation; each piece of knowledge rests upon some other part of knowledge. Over the course of ones life, a person establishes one piece of knowledge and builds upon that. Descartes goes on to doubt every particular set of knowledge he has.

    Read More

  • What is Truth - Comparison of Plato and Peirces Philosophy

    973 Words  | 2 Pages

    Peirce, on the other hand, believed that true knowledge could never be obtained. He believed that truth was future oriented. Peirce’s preferred method of pursuing truth was the scientific method. This method consists of forming a hypothesis and trying to disprove the hypothesis through practical evidence. Although Peirce thought the scientific method was the best approach to search for truth, he believed that it could only be used to disprove a hypothesis, and that nothing could be proven for certain. It is through this idea that his belief that knowledge can never be obtained is founded.

    Read More

  • Descartes Skepticism

    1205 Words  | 3 Pages

    Descartes’ first two Meditations are arguably the most widely known philosophical works. Because of this, one can make the error of assuming that Descartes’ method of doubt is self-evident and that its philosophical implications are relatively minor. However, to assume this would be a grave mistake. In this paper, I hope to spread light on exactly what Descartes’ method of doubt is, and how, though it furnishes challenges for the acceptance of the reality of the external world, it nonetheless does not lead to external world skepticism.

    Read More

  • Compare And Contrast Descartes And Locke

    1019 Words  | 3 Pages

    Descartes defines knowledge as doubt and uncertainty. He describes that our main source of knowledge is our sense perception.

    Read More

  • Descartes's Doubt Method

    952 Words  | 2 Pages

    “The basic strategy of Descartes’ method of doubt is to defeat scepticism on its own ground. Begin by doubting the truth of everything—not only the evidence of the senses and the more extravagant cultural presuppositions, but even the fundamental process of reasoning itself.”( Kemerling).

    Read More

  • Rene Descartes and the Source of Knowledge

    2129 Words  | 5 Pages

    Rene Descartes, a 17th century French philosopher believed that the origin of knowledge comes from within the mind, a single indisputable fact to build on that can be gained through individual reflection. His Discourse on Method (1637) and Meditations (1641) contain his important philosophical theories. Intending to extend mathematical method to all areas of human knowledge, Descartes discarded the authoritarian systems of the scholastic philosophers and began with universal doubt. Only one thing cannot be doubted: doubt itself. Therefore, the doubter must exist. This is the kernel of his famous assertion Cogito, ergo sum (I am thinking, therefore I am existing). From this certainty Descartes expanded knowledge, step by step, to admit the existence of God (as the first cause) and the reality of the physical world, which he held to be mechanistic and entirely divorced from the mind; the only connection between the two is the intervention of God.

    Read More

More about Comparing Descartes and Peirce's Opinions On Knowledge

Open Document