On the Nature of the Universe Since their inception in the 17th century, the modern sciences have been given over to a majestic vision: there is nothing in nature but atoms and the void. This is hardly a new thought, of course; in the ancient world, it received its most memorable expression in Lucretius' On the Nature of Universe. Lucretius Carus wrote an Epicurean work entitled De rerum natura (On the Nature of Things); from all indications, he was faithful to Epicurus' system, changing nothing. History tells us very little of Titus Lucretius Carus, but one can see from reading his work that he has a sturdy abhor towards religious superstition, which he claims is the root of human fear and in turn the cause of impious acts. Although he does not deny the existence of a god, his work is aimed at proving that the world is not guided or controlled by a divinity. Lucretius proceeds with an extended explanation and proof of the materiality and mortality of the mind and soul. This explanation culminates in the climactic declaration, "Nil igitur mors est ad nos. . ." ("Therefore death is nothing to us."), a stark, simple statement which effectively epitomizes the main message and central doctrine of Epicureanism. Sterling Dow, "Dealing with Festschriften" in Articles on Antiquity in Festschriften, compiled by Dorothy Rounds, Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1962, p. 556. According to Lucretius, Sensations are irrefutable because they are necessary effects of known causes, the efflux of atoms from external objects; sensations can only originate when these thin replicas produce movement in the mind. Lucretius asserts that matter exists in the form of atoms, which move around the universe in an empty space. This empty space, or vacuit...
... middle of paper ...
...toms. Wouldn't this suggest that nature is similar to a divinity? Or is nature, which is only matter and space, the wall that separates the gods from mortals. Motivated by an animosity towards theological belief, Lucretius seems to take a much more scientific approach. However, human mortality is productive of tranquility of mind; if death is loss of consciousness through the dissolution of the body and the soul into its component atoms, then there is nothing to fear in death. Death is nothing to us, since the perception of good and evil requires sentience but death is the privation of sentience; this liberates a person to enjoy finite existence without the distraction of the yearning for immortality and fear of possible suffering in the next life. Likewise, the fact that the gods have no interest in human affairs frees one from the fear of the gods in this life.
the vital force that creates all things and the cosmic intellegence that governs it from
The locus classicus for Descartes’ consideration on the laws of motion are the articles 36 through 45 of his Principles and the chapter seven of The World. In The World, Descartes introduces a fable about the creation of the world where he exposes the similitude between God’s creative and preservative acts. Descartes begins considering matter as devoid of all its secondary qualities: ‘let us expressly suppose that it [matter] does not have the form of earth, fire, or air, or any other more specific form, like that of wood, stone, or metal’ (AT XI, 33). Hence, Descartes claims that the only quality remaining in bodies is their extension, which is the only one we can conceive clear and distinct. In the beginning, then, God created an indefinite quantity of matter whose substantial quality is its extension.
Epicurus’s Death argument is very simple, and thus can be hard to refute. The basic premise is that is that no one feels any pain while they are dead, thus being dead is not a painful experience, so being dead is not bad for the one who is dead. My goal for this paper is to prove how those premises fails. In section 1 I will explain in greater detail Epicurus’s argument, in section 2 I will attack those arguments citing various theoretical examples, and in section 3 I will defend my attacks against potential rebuttals.
According to Descartes, the essence of material substance is simply extension, the property of filling up space. (Med. V) So solid geometry, which describes the possibility of dividing an otherwise uniform space into distinct parts, is a complete guide to the essence of body. It follows that there can be in reality only one extended substance, comprising all matter in a single spatial whole. From this, Descartes concluded that individual bodies are merely modes of the one extended being, that there can be no space void of extension, and that all motion must proceed by circular vortex. Thus, again, the true nature of bodies is understood by pure thought, without any information from the senses.
“Cogito ergo sum;” I think therefore I am. This philosophical statement stimulated a renaissance in the field of philosophy, creating modern Western philosophy as is known today. This important notion was dictated by Rene Descartes in his 1641 metaphysics work, Mediations on First Philosophy, and influenced all modern philosophical works written after Descartes revolutionary achievement. This work was written at a time when modern physics was being developed as a mathematization of nature. The principles of metaphysics contain in Meditations were developed in order to serve as the basis for this new system of physics. In it, Descartes refutes many Aristotelian beliefs that were popular and accepted by the clergy for nearly the entirety of Christianity, most notably the idea that all knowledge originates from the senses. Descartes’ opus magnum introduces an entirely new philosophical method, radically different from the traditional Socratic Method, and uses this in order to open his eyes and see through his own false opinions. In Meditations on First Philosophy, Descartes utilizes his methodology of determining the truth to doubt away the foundations of all that he knows, in order to determine that he exists, what he is, how he knows this better than he knows any physical thing, and how he knows that God exists.
Rene Descartes’ third meditation from his book Meditations on First Philosophy, examines Descartes’ arguments for the existence of God. The purpose of this essay will be to explore Descartes’ reasoning and proofs of God’s existence. In the third meditation, Descartes states two arguments attempting to prove God’s existence, the Trademark argument and the traditional Cosmological argument. Although his arguments are strong and relatively truthful, they do no prove the existence of God.
“Cogito ergo sum - I think therefore I am.” A mathematician, scientific thinker, and metaphysician Rene Descartes used this term in his “Meditation on First Philosophy.” This term has become famous especially in western philosophy. However, this term was not Descartes only legacy. His legacies include the development of the Cartesian coordinates, philosophical books, and theories. Even though the distinction between mind and body can be traced to the Greeks, Descartes account of the mind and body relationship has been considered the first and the most influential. Descartes was born in 1596 in France, from 1628 to 1649 Descartes remained in Holland, during this time he composed multiple works that set the scene for all later philosophical study of mind and body. (René Descartes and the legacy of mind/body dualism) “Meditation on First Philosophy,” is one of Descartes famous treatises. First published in the 17th century, it consists of six meditations. In the first meditation Descartes eliminates all belief in things that are not certain, basically he removes everything from the table. Then one by one he examines each belief and determines whether any of these beliefs can be known for sure. Meditations three and five focus on the existence of God. This ontological argument is both fascinating and poorly understood in the philosophical community. Descartes tries to prove God’s existence by using simple but influential foundations. (Nolan). Descartes innate ideas proof and ontological proof of the existence of God is going to be assessed through the summarization of meditation thee and meditation five, while his work is also going to be compared to Anselm’s ontological argument on the existence of God.
Lucretius, a famous Epicurean poet, took a stand against the superstitions and fears that the Romans had toward the state religion. He claimed that religion and the fear of gods was what caused unhappiness. Lucretius wrote a story where the Greek princess Iphigeneia was killed by her father Agamemnon, with the hope that he could win the favor of the gods by sacrificing his own daughter. In this case 'religion stood with all that power for wickedness . . .too many times /religion mothers crime and wickedness'; (Lucretius 452). The Romans at that time saw themselves as 'laying foully groveling on earth, weighed down /by grim religion looming from the skies, threatening mortal men';(Lucretius 451). Epicureanism offered some Roman people something that they could seek in order to escape the fears of the gods and religion in general.
. Its most famous defender is Descartes, who argues that as a subject of conscious thought and experience, he cannot consist simply of spatially extended matter. His essential nature must be non-m...
...of the body, and no problem arises of how soul and body can be united into a substantial whole: ‘there is no need to investigate whether the soul and the body are one, any more than the wax and the shape, or in general the matter of each thing and that of which it is the matter; for while “one” and “being” are said in many ways, the primary [sense] is actuality’ (De anima 2.1, 12B6–9).Many twentieth-century philosophers have been looking for just such a via media between materialism and dualism, at least for the case of the human mind; and much scholarly attention has gone into asking whether Aristotle’s view can be aligned with one of the modern alternatives, or whether it offers something preferable to any of the modern alternatives, or whether it is so bound up with a falsified Aristotelian science that it must regretfully be dismissed as no longer a live option.
qualities on the forces of nature, because we are afraid and powerless against the superior forces of nature. "If men are thought that there is no almighty and all just God, no divine world order and no future life, they will feel exempt from all obligation to obey the precepts of civilization"(pg.44). He is trying to say that because we are so weak and powerless we cannot control the superior forces of nature. There will be chaos without it.
Krauss, Lawrence Maxwell, and Richard Dawkins. A Universe from Nothing: Why There Is Something Rather than Nothing. New York, NY: Free, 2012. 7-8. Print.
Rene Descartes decision to shatter the molds of traditional thinking is still talked about today. He is regarded as an influential abstract thinker; and some of his main ideas are still talked about by philosophers all over the world. While he wrote the "Meditations", he secluded himself from the outside world for a length of time, basically tore up his conventional thinking; and tried to come to some conclusion as to what was actually true and existing. In order to show that the sciences rest on firm foundations and that these foundations lay in the mind and not the senses, Descartes must begin by bringing into doubt all the beliefs that come to him by the senses. This is done in the first of six different steps that he named "Meditations" because of the state of mind he was in while he was contemplating all these different ideas. His six meditations are "One:Concerning those things that can be called into doubt", "Two:Concerning the Nature of the Human mind: that it is better known than the Body", "Three: Concerning God, that he exists", "Four: Concerning the True and the False", "Five: Concerning the Essence of Material things, and again concerning God, that he exists" and finally "Six: Concerning the Existence of Material things, and the real distinction between Mind and Body". Although all of these meditations are relevant and necessary to understand the complete work as a whole, the focus of this paper will be the first meditation.
Rene Descartes’ natural light is his saving grace, and not Achilles’ heel. Descartes incorporates the concept of natural light within his epistemology in order to establish the possibility of knowing things completely without doubt. In fact whatever is revealed to the meditator via the natural light is considered to be indefeasible. The warrant for the truth of these ideas does not rely on experience or the senses. Rather the truth of the idea depends on viewing the concept through clear and distinct perception. Descartes’ “I am, I exist”, (Med. 2, AT 7:25) or the ‘cogito’ is meant to serve as the basis for knowing things through clear and distinct perception. Descartes’ cogito is the first item of knowledge, although one may doubt such things as the existence of the body, one cannot doubt their ability to think. This is demonstrated in that by attempting to doubt one’s ability to think, one is engaging in the action of thought, thus proving that thinking is immune to doubt. With this first item of knowledge Descartes can proceed with his discussion of the possibility of unshakeable knowledge. However, Descartes runs into some difficulty when natural light collides with the possibility of an evil genie bent on deceiving the meditator thus putting once thought concrete truths into doubt. Through an analysis of the concept of natural light I
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.