Descartes’ Method: Rationalism, Doubt, and the Existence of God
Descartes’ Method: A Path to Certainty
The problem of modernity was to avoid error. To this end, a method of scientific research should be ordered. Descartes aimed to create a universal science of knowledge, and science was joined. But mathematics is not a single method. In addition, the contents are non-abstract and useful. He emphasizes the practical value of philosophy. The Greek contemplative nature of knowledge (theory) is lost. Descartes started from scratch. He did not have any confidence in the authority of other philosophers. The Renaissance did not love the historic importance of knowledge. Contents are necessary and universal reason. Innate are the principles of the method. No experience comes from the senses. One finds truth by thinking about it on their own. The method shows the structure of human reason: there is no rational scientific knowledge that does not. Content and ideas are the most important reason for innate ideas. Innate ideas can be considered rationalism. Descartes began modernity, and with it, a priority subject.
Rationalism vs. Empiricism
Rationalism: The tension between reason and faith during the Middle Ages was the main problem. Two things that were completely linked: when faith was needed to obtain truth: God, precisely. Faith is essential to know. Philosophy is the service of theology. Ockham separated the difference between them and the violation of rationality and the path to empiricism. Definition: the seventeenth rationalism. Philosophical currents of the century. Descartes, Leibniz, Spinoza, and Malebranche can be placed in this stream. Empiricism opposes rationalism. Locke, Berkeley, and Hume are the current crop. Rationalism holds that reason is a self-sufficient source of knowledge. Indeed, the principle of judgment is the same as not. Rationalism: reason comes from the knowledge of reality. The principles of science are native. Experience has little value. There is a rational justification for all the world.
Empiricism: Sensitive knowledge comes from experience. The principles of science will be learned from experience.
Descartes’ Method: Four Rules
1. Descartes’ Method: Descartes had a method to find the truth, which could be followed in steps. 2. Advantages of the Method: The method eliminates error. It allows you to obtain new knowledge. 3. Four Rules of the Method:
- Certainty: “I did not ever consider anything true, unless I had certainties of it.”
- Analysis: “Divide each difficulty into as many parts as possible and necessary to resolve it.”
- Synthesis: “My thoughts organized the order of things, starting from easy, and constantly to more complex degrees of knowledge, things are not sorted itself clearly, assuming that order.”
- Confirmation: “I would like to make enumerations so complete, and reviews so general, that I would be assured that nothing was omitted.”
4. Four Rules Explained: The first time this rule is too simple a picture, Descartes’ method was easy to achieve, however. However, we have carefully analyzed.
Methods of Descartes, like Galileo’s, include the composition of the budget resolution. However, it does not matter to experiment. Conceptual analysis of Descartes and the rational reason for this deduction is based on the importance to them. Deductive methods of Descartes have to do with Euclid’s method: a long chain of deduction from the principles of some simple and safe (and the definition of Axiom, for example). The first rule is adopted to ensure that only known it. It is the certainty of intuition, the mind acts in a completely rational, fact. Secure and intuitive idea must be clear and specific. Descartes himself said: “Spirit, I call light alert perception that has been shown and described specific, detailed and so different from everything that should be compared with others as part of her research has found not only contains.” All of this is the true Cartesian spirit could be said to be immanent. The second and third-analysis of the policies described in the synthesis process. Analysis of the simple nature of art to be found, synthesis, however, lies in an organized process of deduction. Important concepts in Descartes are a simple idea. Analytical method is the result of the process. Here is an example: “I cannot say that a body is formed by corporality, extension, and image, there is no features that can be found separately, but the terms of our intelligence, it is said, we are in the same subject as we represent the three characteristics separately before judging.” Then we will see two “simple natures” important: “dimension” and “thinking” are. Finally, our intuitive knowledge of the value of security is guaranteed by the synthesis of Descartes and updated analysis of reviews you are required to the way this whole process can get some intuitive certainty. Full evidence synthesis method is the first evidence of a truth process and we need to find the whole process.
Methodological Doubt
The method is to find a clear proposal. This question involves radical uncertainty, i.e. No doubt it is skeptical, but methodical: without a doubt the truth that leads to the question. “Discourse of the Method” treats the subject of doubt, “Metaphysical Meditation” determines it to be his last. Descartes is the conclusion to which the proposal cannot have doubts that the experience of methodical doubt is exceeded, or the mathematical proposal. We cannot confirm nor correct. Certainly cannot have both, could be false. This denial is a result of philosophical empiricism, empiricism holds that knowledge is derived from the feelings and experiences and to assess that. Nihilism is to pass this point: “there is nothing in the world, not world, not body, I think that there is not anything…” It is doubtful that the final and reached the summit. From now on he it is the return of Descartes. If the motions of a question I cannot: it is impossible, from a logical perspective, to question. Any doubts that involves being a thinker, and there is no doubt of it.
Cogito, Ergo Sum
1. I think, therefore I am (Cogito, ergo sum). It is a conceptual fact. I’m not deceived by an evil genius, do not fool anyone if there is no deception. People must be deceived. This question may be what people are thinking, but do not think about illness. “Cogito, ergo sum” and the first principle of his philosophy is the starting point. Intuitive and sometimes do not arrive at the deduction. The first truth is safe and without a doubt. I am a substance whose nature and essence of the thinking and does not need anything corporal. Body and soul is unique, but the actual body of knowledge easier.
Analysis of the Cogito
2. Analysis of the Cogito. Augustine of Hippo’s impact on Descartes’ Cogito is obvious. In the book “City of God” Augustine wrote: “And if you deceive yourself? I deceive myself, if I am.” In the Cogito there are two elements: existence and thought.
2.1. Thought: According to Descartes the mind is not a pure action: a set of things, but: “What am I there? Think of something. What is the thinking of something? To doubt, understand, conceive, confirm, deny it, want to, do not want to, and imagine and feel something.”
2.2. Existence: Descartes starts his from within. Existence through his thoughts: the self is thought to exist. These characteristics of the Cogito are:
- It is not a syllogism: This syllogism would be: “all think that there are, I think, so if I am.” It is not like that. We are in front of a mind, intuition, and intuition are no deduction.
- The idea is clear and specific: evidence and is, therefore, not appear to be reasonable intelligence.
- The truth is final.
God as the Criterion of Certainty
God, Criterion of Certainty. Cogito is a criterion of certainty. The first problem is that the thoughts of how to extract the body of the material world and the existence of proof. Another difficulty is explained by God, as almighty, the easiest thing to deceive you view the man has created. Thoughts at something that is not guaranteed. If not, here comes the philosophy of Descartes, would fall into solipsism: me and my thoughts are there, nothing more. Being an ideal and does not deceive infinite existence we need. If God is to clarify, you have to know in advance what it is. What is not known is the existence of proof. Therefore, knowledge of God’s essence is the starting point to prove its existence.
Proofs for the Existence of God
Evidence of the existence of God. Descartes used three tests: 1. Knowing is better than doubting. I’m living I can doubt imperfect, something perfect has to exist. Two arguments have been added: a) does not match anything from nothing and b) can not be perfect come from imperfect. 2. The first is complementary. The idea of perfection is not something that came from imperfect. 3. St. Anselm’s ontological argument is a version of God is the idea of being perfect idea. But if being a perfect exists. Therefore, God exists.
Extended Substance: The Body
Extended substances. Body. 1. External proof of the existence of the world. I could not fool the outside world the existence of God, and the flesh is very good. 2. Extension. This does not mean material things we think we have all the characteristics. Descartes used Galileo’s distinction between primary and secondary qualities. The first level is the body, are objective. Secondary are subjective: color, smell, taste… outside world has only primary qualities. Length of the outside world has its own qualities.