Descartes’ Method for Knowledge: Intuition and Deduction
Cartesian Method
The reaction against Cartesian skepticism, coupled with Descartes’ interest in science, strengthens the rejection of error and the search for truth. Descartes repeatedly insists on the need to reject error, which is inevitably associated with the search for truth. He aimed to investigate and determine something with certainty, even if that something seemed beyond real knowledge. The idea that we need a method to attain knowledge led Descartes to clarify that this method should mirror the one mathematicians use, as the method itself validates mathematical knowledge. If reason is singular, knowledge is unique and must have a single method for gaining wisdom. Descartes never abandoned the ideal of universal knowledge, viewed in two ways: a) as a unique foundation of all knowledge, and b) as the full acquisition of wisdom. However, a method is required: “a certain set of rules, simple and easy, such that all persons who follow them will never mistake something false for true, and without mental effort, but by increasing their knowledge step by step, will reach a true understanding of all things within their capacity.”
Rules
Rule I
Science becomes wisdom, a universal and human wisdom. This is a set of interconnected elements, called knowledge or truths. Knowing one truth opens the door to another, and so on. To know one truth, we rely on and assume other truths. Studying isolated knowledge is useless, as it truncates its purpose of generating strong judgments about reality.
Rule II
True wisdom requires starting with familiar and simple objects to achieve perfect science and certainty. Complex and difficult objects lead to confusion and uncertainty, potentially decreasing knowledge. However, these complex subjects should not be abandoned but refined to guide students securely. There are two ways of knowing: experience and deduction, with experience presenting more opportunities for error.
Rule III
Proper study involves intuition (a concept formed by intelligence based on reason, offering the greatest response due to its simplicity) and deduction (drawing conclusions from known certainties). Intuition is immediate and simple, while deduction requires continuous thought. We should not rely on others’ views or guesses; self-belief through intuition or deduction ensures validity.
Rule IV
Descartes introduces the method. To succeed in the pursuit of knowledge and truth, we must be organized. This involves organizing ideas and following simple, accurate rules to distinguish true from false, expanding knowledge. Applying the method through intuition reveals truth, while deduction leads to knowledge. The method is effective for scientific knowledge and any truth-seeking endeavor.
Removal of Things
Descartes’ first meditation examines reasons for doubt. The senses, though a primary knowledge source, often deceive. Therefore, all sensory-derived knowledge is subject to doubt and put on hold. Even immediate sensory data can be questioned, as we cannot distinguish wakefulness from sleep. This inability extends doubt to intellectual operations derived from the senses. Mathematical knowledge is also questioned, as a deceiving God could make us err even in obvious truths like 2+2=4. Thus, all abilities become questionable.
Evil Genius
To avoid offending believers, Descartes proposes an evil genius who consistently makes us mistake the false for true. This possibility makes all abilities suspect, extending doubt to all knowledge, sensory or otherwise. Uncertainty surrounds all knowledge.
Truth First, Then Exist Pins
In the second meditation, forced to doubt everything, Descartes realizes that to be deceived, he must exist. The proposition “I think, therefore I am” (“cogito, ergo sum”) is necessarily true whenever conceived. This proposition surpasses all doubt, even with an evil genius. It is presented clearly and distinctly, meeting the criteria for certainty. This first truth, characterized by clarity and distinction, becomes the foundation for rebuilding knowledge, following the mathematical method of implication to draw further conclusions.