Rene Descartes' Methodic Doubt

KIRK ROBERTS REBOROSO
II- PHILOSOPHY
THEORIES OF KNOWLEDGE
DR. PAOLO BOLANOS
RENE DESCARTES METHODIC DOUBT

Introduction:
Rene Descartes is widely considered as the father of modern philosophy. His
remarkable contributions extended to mathematics and physics. This entry focuses
on his philosophical contributions in the theory of knowledge. Descartes' pursuit of
mathematical and scientific truth soon led to a profound rejection of the scholastic
tradition in which he had been educated. He is a rationalist, in a way that he view
knowledge as innate or inborn and comes from the mind alone. Knowledge for him
doesnt come from the use of the five senses. Much of his work was concerned
with the provision of a secure foundation for the advancement of human
knowledge through the natural sciences. He lived from 1596 to 1650. He is a good
example of unconventional thinking leading him to new ideas and discoveries. His
background was mathematics, which to him gave certainty and definite
measurement capabilities. He wanted to apply these concepts that he learned in
mathematics to the natural world, but found that established rules and truths that
were the basis of geometry and mathematics were nonexistent in the natural world.
Instead, the views of the world held by most people were based on assumptions
that might not necessarily be true. He noted that people took things that they
learned in childhood as truth, without even thinking about or questioning them.
To get past being himself caught in the trap of preconceived ideas preventing
him from learning about the truth, Descartes started doubting any and all alleged
truths. This is called Methodic doubt, in which a person doubt everything, his
beliefs, ideas, thoughts and matter until he arrived at something that is
undoubtable, and then, we used it as a foundation of our knowledge. An analogy
for understanding the Methodic Doubt is the principle in jurisprudence that a
person is innocent until proven guilty. Descartes believes that ideas coming from
the senses are guilty until proven innocent. He showed that his grounds, or
reasoning, for any knowledge could just as well be false. Then he proposed the
stages of doubting process:
Problems:
1.)
Senses
He said that our senses cannot be trusted. The senses are sometimes wrong and
many of our ideas come from the senses, therefore, many of our ideas could be
wrong. Sensory experience, the primary mode of knowledge, is often erroneous
and therefore must be doubted. For instance, what one is seeing may very well be a
hallucination. For example, from afar, you claim that you saw your father, but in
reality its your uncle. Thus, senses could trick us.
2.)
Content of experience
Descartes said that, what if our experience is just only a dream. Descartes had
written that: every sensory experience I have ever thought I was having while
awake I can also think of myself as sometimes having while asleep. The problem
here is that how can someone prove that he is not dreaming. How can you
distinguish dreaming state from waking state? , this tentatively concludes that the
results of empirical disciplines are doubtful, for example, physics, astronomy,
medicine, and the like. Whereas: Arithmetic, geometry and other subjects of this
kind, which deal only with the simplest and most general things, regardless of
whether they really exist in nature or not, contain something certain and
indubitable. For whether I am awake or asleep, two and three added together are
five, and a square has no more than four sides. It seems impossible that such
transparent truths should incur any suspicion of being false. (Med. 1, AT 7:20)
Some attempts proving that one is awake:
-I know that I am awake because I can pinch myself.
=Fails because I can dream that I am pinching myself.
-I know that I,m awake because I remember going to sleep.
=Fails because I could have been dreaming that went to sleep.
3.)
Mathematics
Mathematics survived in the dream state but not in the evil-genius hypothesis.
Although, if I am dreaming, I can still know that 2+2=4 and I know that all
triangles have three sides. Many people think that mathematics is the most exact
and precise. But what if there is a malicious demon or evil genius who simply
impose to our minds some mathematical operations. . Suppose I am the creation of
a powerful but malicious being. This evil genius or deceiving God, or whatever I
may call him, has given me flawed cognitive faculties, such that I am in error
even about epistemically impressive matters even the simple matters that seem
supremely evident. The suggestion is unbelievable, but not unthinkable. It is
intended as a justification-defeating doubt that undermines our judgments about

even the most simple and evident matters.
4.) Self
Descartes said that, What if I doubt my existence. What if I doubt that I exist?
Descartes said that, I have convinced myself that there is absolutely nothing in the
world, no sky, no earth, no minds, no bodies. Does it now follow that I too do not
exist? No: if I convinced myself of something then I certainly existed. But there is
a deceiver of supreme power and cunning who is deliberately and constantly
deceiving me. In that case I too undoubtedly exist, if he is deceiving me; and let
him deceive me as much as he can, he will never bring it about that I am nothing so
long as I think that I am something. So after considering everything very
thoroughly, I must finally conclude that this proposition, I am, I exist, is necessarily
true whenever it is put forward by me or conceived in my mind. (Med. 2, AT 7:25)
Response:
1.) Senses
In the Criterion of Truth, as long as you precede that it is clear and distinct, it must
be true. Senses, as long as you perceived things clearly and distinctly, they should
be reliable, otherwise, do not pass judgment. Descartes just want to say is that do
not accept unclear ideas.
2.)
Content of Experience
Descartes offers a naturalistic solution to the problem (viz., a non-theistic solution),

in the form of a continuity test: since continuity with past experiences holds only
of waking but not dreaming, checking for the requisite continuity is the test for
ascertaining that one is awake. The following remarks can be read in this way:
I now notice that there is a vast difference between the two being asleep and
being awake, in that dreams are never linked by memory with all the other actions
of life as waking experiences are. But when I distinctly see where things come
from and where and when they come to me, and when I can connect my
perceptions of them with the whole of the rest of my life without a break, then I am
quite certain that when I encounter these things I am not asleep but awake. (Med.
6, AT 7:8990)
3.)
Mathematics
In the I think, therefore I exist, It draws that we are finite beings, that we are not
the cause of our own existence. Descartes strongly believes that there must be this
infinite being, which is God. And if God is evil, then what can we know? Answer: I
cannot know anything. Therefore, God is good. And if God is good, why God
made deceptive upon his name, which is s malicious demon. So, there is no
malicious demon. It concludes that mathematics is reliable.
4.) Self
Lets remember few things about the Cogito Argument. The I is the mind, not the
body. Even if I cannot be certain of my senses or basic math, I can be certain that
I, which is the mind, exist. Here is a proof of Descartes argument: try to deny
the sentence I am thinking. If you deny the sentence, then you are forming the
belief I am not thinking. You have formed a contradiction because you asserted
P and -P. As Descartes writes: When someone says I am thinking, therefore I
am, or I exist, he does not deduce existence from thought by means of a
syllogism, but recognizes it as something self-evident by a simple intuition of the
mind. (Replies 2, AT 7:140)
Conclusion:
Important to note that:
-dont accept unclear ideas, accept only information you know to be true.
-breaking down these truths into smaller units.
-solving the simple problems first.
-make complete lists of further problems or generalize.
References:
Ren Descartes, Meditation I, 1641
Hoffman, Paul, 1996. Descartes on Misrepresentation, Journal of the History of
Philosophy, 34 (July): 357381.
Bennett, Jonathan, 1990. Truth and Stability in Descartes' Meditations, Canadian
Journal of Philosophy, 16 (supplement): 75108.
Stanford Encyclopedia.com
Special thanks to Sir Aldous Baccay

Rene Descartes' Methodic Doubt

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Rene Descartes' Methodic Doubt

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Rene Descartes' Methodic Doubt

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

KIRK ROBERTS REBOROSO

RENE DESCARTES METHODIC DOUBT

intended as a justification-defeating doubt that undermines our judgments about

Descartes offers a naturalistic solution to the problem (viz., a non-theistic solution),

You might also like