Descartes Argument To Distrust Our Senses?

797 Words2 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: science vs religion

Would you say someone is knowledgeable about matter x if that person has no justification to back such claims? Wouldn’t it be foolish to undoubtedly believe a fortune teller, to place your bets on reason less predictions? I simply ask you to be wise, as wise as the wisest of men, as wise as Socrates for he knew he knew nothing. Today, two thousand sixteen years later we possess just about as much knowledge as he did. Surprisingly it would come to me if someone would not argue otherwise. Arguments backup up by medical advancements, technology, and multiple discoveries in the natural sciences. Explanations looking to demolish the idea that we know nothing, but in fact we cannot be sure, and by not being, we know nothing. Descartes argument is …show more content…

One of them is the impossible task to know with certainty that we are not dreaming as he states, “…in my dressing-gown, sitting…when in fact I am lying undressed in bed!” and “…there are never any sure signs…being awake can be distinguished from being asleep” (Descartes, p.301). Nonetheless, an argument could be drawn where one can feel pain while awake that in a dream would otherwise be the ticket out. I beg to differ for I’ve felt joy, pain, and misery in a dream without it being disturbed. Who’s to say pinching oneself is the flawless test to our question? The problem is not to trust our senses, the problem is if we should, there solely is no way to be certain. The issue of not being skeptic, and accepting such conclusion that senses are in no way tools from where one can be deceive as a fact is the mistake. Nevertheless, not all has to be challenged for its existence. One thing for certain is that no matter how wicked a dream, or “reality” seem from one another such sciences such as arithmetic, and geometry would persist on both. Descartes reasons, “For whether I am awake or asleep, two and three added together are five…” (Descartes, pg.301).
Furthermore, if truth is found on us being deceived by our senses, then who is up to blame for our deception. Descartes argues that not God who is omnibenevolent, all good and truthful, but an evil demon who orchestrates such deception. One who’s goal is to surround

Show More
Related

  • The Reasons Of Descartes: The Dream Argument For Skepticism

    902 Words  | 2 Pages

    Just because the person is so engulfed in a dream that it is impossible for that individual to recognize disparities between these 2 experiences, these same person can nevertheless tell the difference once he or she has awakened. Moreover, a sensation as clear as pain cannot feel the same as the pain we feel when awaken, some argue. After all, Descartes premise is based on the idea that there is nothing in reality that a dream cannot replicate so vividly that we are unable to tell the difference. But he also said that dreams borrow, in a sense, some but not all things from reality so these may not be but somewhat plausible events made up by our

    Read More

  • Thought Experiment By Rene Descartes

    1146 Words  | 3 Pages

    René Descartes was a French philosopher who refused to believe that true knowledge was obtainable through the means of sense perception. Descartes believed that the senses; as we know them, could be manipulated and twisted into providing false understanding of the external world. In the search for the truth amongst what we perceive in life, Descartes is justified in his claims that our senses cannot be trusted. Only by questioning all that is known as human beings, can one find the absolute truth in life. Through the use of two different thought experiments, Descartes uses reasoning to questions what we perceive as reality and truth.

    Read More

  • Analysis Of Descartes Evil Deceiver

    1373 Words  | 3 Pages

    In his quest for absolute, firm knowledge, Descartes eventually reaches a standstill that could prevent him from moving forward on his journey. This obstacle manifests itself in the form of an evil deceiver, a malicious entity with the ability to distort Descartes’ perceptions and trick him into believing a false claim to be truthful. The evil deceiver would endlessly mislead Descartes into thinking that an aspect of life were true. Given the power of this evil deceiver, Descartes would never know if the truths that he is reaching are in fact truthful. This conundrum in which Descartes finds himself encourages him to find some mechanism to counter the idea of an evil deceiver. Descartes realizes that the existence of God will eradicate the fear

    Read More

  • Analysis Of Descartes Foundationalism

    1378 Words  | 3 Pages

    Descartes’ first foundational argument asserts that one can have knowledge of one’s own existence. The claim is essential to many arguments that follow because it survives his “Deceiver Hypothesis.” This hypothesis states that “there may be a powerful deceiver of supreme power who is deliberately and constantly deceiving me” (Med III, p. 17). This demonstrates that we cannot know, or be sure of, anything based on sensory experience alone. However, Descartes supports the idea that some things can be known entirely outside of sensory experience; through the use of logic and re...

    Read More

  • Descartes Dualism Analysis

    1000 Words  | 2 Pages

    In Descartes’ Meditations on First Philosophy he proposes several arguments regarding human perception. He begins this exploration by examining the principles that his beliefs are founded on. By doing this, Descartes is choosing not to question each of his beliefs individually; he is choosing to examine the foundation of his perceptions. Descartes proceeds to question where he has attained his knowledge. The answer, he decides, is from his senses. Descartes also determines that there have been instances where his senses have been deceptive. It is from this idea that Descartes forms his deductions for Meditations I, II, and VI, and begins to question the concept of dualism.

    Read More

  • Meditation By Rene Descartes

    1373 Words  | 3 Pages

    Descartes explains that, “For in the case of trickery or deception some imperfection is to be found; and although the ability to deceive appears to be an indication of cleverness or power, the will to deceive is undoubtedly evidence of malice or weakness, and so cannot apply to God” (Descartes 43). I agree that if God is a perfect being that truly exists, he would not have any reason to deceive humans, and that humans are imperfect because of our own volitions and poor judgement. However this still does not make clear and distinct perceptions true. Again, even if God is not deceiving us, our minds still can. Additionally, this point only makes sense in Descartes’ definition of God, which, again, is merely an assumption. Descartes gives a sound explanation on why God is not a deceiver, however that does not immediately make it true that everything should not be doubted just because we can perceive it clearly.

    Read More

  • Descartes Meditation 1 Analysis

    958 Words  | 2 Pages

    He argues that if he does not solve God’s existence, he will not be certain about anything else. Thus, Descartes says that he has an idea of God and, therefore, God exists. However, in order to be certain of His existence, Descartes provides proofs that will illustrate his reasoning. The four proofs include formal reality vs. objective reality, something can’t arise from nothing, Descartes cannot be the cause of himself, and therefore, the bigger cause is God. Now that Descartes knows God is real, he must solve another aspect, which is if God can be a deceiver. Descartes believes “it is clear enough from this that he cannot be a deceiver, since it is manifest by the natural light that all fraud and deception depend on some defect” (89). In other words, God possesses all of the perfections that Descartes cannot have but those perfections that are in his thoughts, concluding that God has no defects whatsoever according to the natural

    Read More

  • Plato's The Allegory Of The Cave And Cogito Ergo Sum

    871 Words  | 2 Pages

    It is easy for us to believe that what we experience with our senses is true, including in our dreams, but according to Descartes, we should look beyond our senses and use reasoning to determine what is certain. Descartes’ question, “For how do we now that the thoughts that arise in us while we are dreaming are more false than others, since they are often no less vivid and explicit?” (34), is asked so that we will acknowledge that our senses can easily mislead us. This should then cause us to use reasoning to differentiate between truth and illusion, and both authors agree that reasoning should be the guide to true knowledge. Though he believes in the attainability of certain knowledge through using reasoning, Descartes argues that there are only a few things about which we can be certain. Descartes’s philosophy “Cogito, Ergo Sum,” which means I think, therefore I am proves this. He believes that because our mind acknowledges that we can think and have doubts, we can be sure of our existence; if we stopped th...

    Read More

  • Descartes Skepticism

    1205 Words  | 3 Pages

    The most important of these is the agency, or control, of the subject over its own mind. While it may be evident that, of course, one has control over what one thinks about, in reality, there are many cases in which thoughts arise unbidden, or a memory suddenly appears, fresh as day. A good example of this may, in fact, be dreaming. Dreaming is a case in which our psychic apparatus controls the dream, and yet, what we perceive as ‘ourselves’ in the dream does not actually have agency over the content or progression of the dream itself, nor privileged information about what events will emerge. If, according to Descartes’ method, we are to get rid of any faculty that has been shown to be not totally reliable, then we are to get rid of the faculty of agency, which of course would undermine the method of doubt, that assumes the faculty of agency precisely in order to doubt. This is one reason to render doubtful the validity of Descartes’ method, however, it is not enough to salvage external world

    Read More

  • Argumentative Essay: Cartesian Skepticism Created By René Descartes

    892 Words  | 2 Pages

    With Descartes’ ideology of the senses and how they allow for deception of the individual, how are we supposed to be able to differentiate between when we are in a dream or when we are actually in reality? When we are in a dream as well as in reality, the senses seem real and we believe that what we experience is true; however, according to Descartes, the only way to determine whether or not an individual is experiencing a dream is through the use of their thought processing. Within reality, there are certain aspects that allow one to realize that they are presently living in reality. These two main aspects are routine and patterns that are performed on the daily basis such as, going to work, eating breakfast, or even brushing your

    Read More

  • Serious Errors within Rene Descartes’ Meditations on First Philosophy

    1094 Words  | 3 Pages

    In the first meditation, Descartes makes a conscious decision to search for “in each of them [his opinions] at least some reason for doubt”(12). Descartes rejects anything and everything that can be doubted and quests for something that is undeniably certain. The foundation of his doubt is that his opinions are largely established by his senses, yet “from time to time I [Descartes] have found that the senses deceive, and it is prudent never to trust completely those who have deceived us even once”(12). First, Descartes establishes that error is possible, employing the example of the straight stick that appears bent when partially submerged in water, as mentioned in the Sixth Replies (64-65). Secondly, he proves that at any given time he could be deceived, such is the case with realistic dreams. Further, Descartes is able to doubt absolutely everything since it cannot be ruled out that “some malicious demon … has employed all his energies in order to deceive me” (15). The malicious demon not only causes Descartes to doubt God, but also sends him “unexpectedly into a deep whirlpool which tumbles me around so that I can neither stand on the bottom or swim on the top”(16). Descartes has reached the point where he must begin to rebuild by searching for certainty.

    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

  • Descartes View on the Senses

    661 Words  | 2 Pages

    Descartes first meditation included a few arguments that Descartes studied and analyze. The one I choose to analyze was his argument of sense deception. The actually argument is the following: (1) My senses sometimes deceive me. (2) If my senses sometimes deceive me, then they might always deceive me. (3) If my senses might always deceive me, then I cannot be certain about any beliefs acquired through my senses. (4) If I cannot be certain about any beliefs acquired through my senses, then I must suspend judgment on those beliefs. (5) Therefore I must suspend my judgment of those beliefs. To put this is premise conclusion argument form, it would look like this:

    Read More

  • Descartes' Meditations

    2133 Words  | 5 Pages

    Within meditation one Descartes subjects all of his beliefs regarding sensory data and even existence to the strongest and most hyperbolic of doubts. He invokes the notion of the all powerful, malign demon who could be deceiving him regarding sensory experience and even his understanding of the simplest mathematical and logical truths in order to attain an indubitable premise that is epistemologically formidable. In meditation one Descartes has three areas of doubt, doubt of his own existence, doubt of the existence of God, and doubt of the existence of the external world. Descartes’ knowledge of these three areas are subjected to three types of scepticism the first where he believes that his senses are being deceived ‘these senses played me false, and it is prudent never to trust entirely those who have once deceived us’. The second of the forms of scepticism revolves around whether Descartes is dreaming or not ‘I see so clearly that there are no conclusive signs by means of which one can distinguish between being awake and being asleep’. The aforementioned malign demon was Descartes third method of doubt as he realised God would not deceive him.

    Read More

  • Descartes Universal Doubt Of Senses Analysis

    1471 Words  | 3 Pages

    We are taught, at a young age, how important our five senses are. These senses are essential to survival and are the necessary feedback for our existence. The question becomes though, what are really our senses? Touch, smell, sight, hearing, taste are the ones engrained into us, but there’s more to it, we can sense temperature, acceleration, movement, and even intangible things such as hostility, fear, or even someone or something’s gaze. While questioning why these are important and vital senses it raises a question of what is not included in the taught set of senses. Are senses real or are they a figment of our imagination created to give us a virtual reality? When people have senses that are better than others does that make our senses reliable? Rene Descartes ran into these questions himself in his Meditations on First. He distorted the perspective of senses by relabeling the concept of dreams, the beliefs of a powerful entity, and the mind itself. Descartes decides to call all individual opinions into doubt,

    Read More

More about Descartes Argument To Distrust Our Senses?

Open Document