Meditation
1. The Meditation of yesterday has filled my mind with so many doubts, that it is no longer in my power
to forget them. Nor do I see, meanwhile, any principle on which they can be resolved; and, just as if I
had fallen all of a sudden into very deep water, I am so greatly disconcerted as to be unable either to
plant my feet firmly on the bottom or sustain myself by swimming on the surface. I will, nevertheless,
make an effort, and try anew the same path on which I had entered yesterday, that is, proceed by
casting aside all that admits of the slightest doubt, not less than if I had discovered it to be absolutely
false; and I will continue always in this track until I shall find something that is certain, or at least, if I
can do nothing more, until I shall know with certainty that there is nothing certain. Archimedes, that he
might transport the entire globe from the place it occupied to another, demanded only a point that was
firm and immovable; so, also, I shall be entitled to entertain the highest expectations, if I am fortunate
enough to discover only one thing that is certain and indubitable.[ L][ F]
2. I suppose, accordingly, that all the things which I see are false (fictitious); I believe that none of
those objects which my fallacious memory represents ever existed; I suppose that I possess no
senses; I believe that body, figure, extension, motion, and place are merely fictions of my mind. What is
there, then, that can be esteemed true ? Perhaps this only, that there is absolutely nothing certain.[ L][
F]
3. But how do I know that there is not something different altogether from the objects I have now
enumerated, of which it is impossible to entertain the slightest doubt? Is there not a God, or some
being, by whatever name I may designate him, who causes these thoughts to arise in my mind ? But
why suppose such a being, for it may be I myself am capable of producing them? Am I, then, at least
not something? But I before denied that I possessed senses or a body; I hesitate, however, for what
follows from that? Am I so dependent on the body and the senses that without these I cannot exist?
But I had the persuasion that there was absolutely nothing in the world, that there was no sky and no
earth, neither minds nor bodies; was I not, therefore, at the same time, persuaded that I did not exist?
Thus, after everything has been most carefully weighed, it must finally be established that "I am, I exist" is necessarily true every time I put it forward or conceive it in my mind.
which is itself a point of certainty, or he reached the one undeniable truth he
I will suppose therefore that not God, who is supremely good and the source of truth, but rather some malicious demon of the utmost power and cunning has employed all his energies in order to deceive me. I shall think that the sky, the air, the earth, colours, shapes, sounds and all external things are merely the delusions of dreams which he has devised to ensnare my judgment.
Now, it is certain as a matter of sense-observation that some things in this world are in
The point of the piece of was is that you can’t be sure of anything because what you think is real about
This radical separation of mind and body makes it difficult to account for the apparent interaction of the two in my own case. In ordinary experience, it surely seems that the volitions of my mind can cause physical movements in my body and that the physical states of my body can produce effects on my mental operations. But on Descartes's view, there can be no substantial connection between the two, nor did he believe it appropriate to think of the mind as residing in the body as a pilot resides within a ship. Although he offered several tenatative suggestions in his correspondence with Princess Elizabeth, Descartes largely left for future generations the task of developing some reasonable account of volition and sensation, either by securing the possibility of mind-body interaction or by proposing some alternative explanation of the appearances.
It is also important to realize that our mind doubts things because it knows its own limits. Thus since we know nothing to be certain it is important to use softening phrases such as “perhaps, somewhat, some, they say, I think, and so on (356)”. Montaigne was constantly amazed at how much knowledge we claimed to be sure of.
Creation in and of itself is an indisputable example of the existence of a higher being. The very existence of our universe and the things in it proves beyond a doubt that the...
Therefore, with every proposition we could possibly apprehend (whether true or not) each of their constituents are real entities with which we do have immediate acquaintance, so long as we can apprehend them.
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.
A logically self-contradictory utterance is not only false, it cannot possibly describe anything. Therefore, it may also be called an impossible description. A tautological utterance, on the other hand, says something true, but it supplies no new information about the world. Therefore, from a common sense point of view, it is a superfluous description. There are at least, I will show, three other kinds of utterances which adequately can be called impossible descriptions and three which can be called superfluous descriptions. Only views which belong ...
One knows that one causes some of one 's own ideas read in Principles of Human knowledge page 28. Since the mind is passive in perception, there are ideas which one 's own mind does not
...feasibility' and 'Causal' theories, and knowledge as 'warranted true belief' require us to take a certain 'leap of faith' when considering the question of knowledge at times. In order to avoid scepticism, I hold that knowledge does not necessarily need to be infallible, but rather probable. This does not mean that a proposition does not need to be true, it means that something we hold as knowledge is not one which is beyond reasonable doubt, but one which it wouldn't make sense to doubt. Yes, we have an obligation to avoid doxastic errors by reflecting on our belief-forming processes and by adjusting them in pursuit of reliability, but we also need to make a reasonable link between reality and truth to the extent that a proposition becomes senseless to doubt. So, although Gettier problems may be inescapable, this does not mean we are starved of knowledge completely.
...onclude by saying that there are no absolute distinctions between what is true and what is false. It depends upon perception, emotions, reasoning and language. And therefore we cannot prove anyone wrong by saying that this is the perfect or right way of looking at things as every individual has different perceptions based on reasoning, emotions and language. So one should learn to accept other people’s opinions and perceptions as nobody is likely to have a same perception like others. The distinctions would be relative in various areas of knowledge like the ones discussed above.
“Do We Really Know What's Real? The Most Optimistic Answer Is Maybe.” The Huffington Post, TheHuffingtonPost.com, 3 Aug. 2015, www.huffingtonpost.com/deepak-chopra/do-we-really-know-whats-r_b_7926894.html.