I Think Therefore I Am

Descartes - Cogito, Ergo Sum (The Circle Game)

The Circle Game: "Descartes was a philosophical disaster!" Attacking Descate's Cogito from within Descartes's own logical structure rather than from a modern context. 

Examining Descartes's philosophy from within its own logical structure, we see that Descartes is unable to escape the necessity of an observer in his attempt to find a foundation for his philosophy. As I will show, he grounds his philosophy on the postulates of his ability to discern truth from  fiction and his own existence. Descartes foundationalist philosophy fails, as a result, because neither the infallibility and integrity of the observer nor the observer's existence are certain.

Descartes attempts to create a foundationalist philosophy based on a single, undeniable truth which he knows to be "fixed and assured". He takes "I think, therefore I am"  "as the first principle of the philosophy I was seeking", believing that this is the only truth which is necessary to ufound a philosophy. His logical structure , however, relies on a second postulate. He claims that "the capacity to judge correctly and to distinguish the true from the false is naturally equal in all men". This postulate is more fundamental to his logical structure than the cogito because without it, he cannot escape the skepticism of his foundationalist structure. 

Unpacking the significance of this postulate is somewhat of a metaphysical thicket, but the effort is well rewarded. There is no question that by thinking "I think, therefore I am", Descartes is thinking. Beyond the statement of his existence, however, Descartes cannot form any other conclusion unless he has the ability to discern the truth of a thought-except the conclusion that he is, there is no method to discern a true thought from a thought implanted into his head by an other being unless he can make the distinction himself. If he is to make any progress in his philosophy, he must rely on this second postulate.

Even with this condition, Descartes's philosophy remains unstable. His first postulate, the cogito, fails because it depends on the integrity of the subject, the ego. Unlike a similar postulate of mathematics, such as x+0=x, which does not depend on the integrity of the observer in order to be true, Descartes's postulate is singularly tied to the subject because the subject, the "I", is an integral part of the statement. In the postulate, the "I" must be distinct since the cogito makes no claims about the existence of anything outside the mind. Descartes admits, however, that the mind is subject to failings caused by the body:

"the mind depends so much on the temperament and on the disposition of the organs of the body, that if it is possible to find some means of rendering men as a whole wiser and more dexterous than they have been hitherto, I believe it must be sought in medicine".

Furthermore, the mind cannot be sure of even its own state. Descartes admits that "there are no conclusive signs by means of which one can distinguish clearly between being awake and being asleep". Most significantly, however, Descartes requires the fallibility of his mind in order to prove the existence of God... 

---

Descartes’ Epistemology

René Descartes (1596–1650) is widely regarded as the father of modern philosophy. His noteworthy contributions extend to mathematics and physics. This entry focuses on his philosophical contributions in the theory of knowledge. Specifically, the focus is on the epistemological project of his famous work, Meditations on First Philosophy. Descartes circulated the Meditations to other philosophers for objections and comments. He responded with detailed replies that provide a rich source of further information about the original work. Indeed, six sets of objections and replies were published with the first edition of the Meditations (1641), and a seventh set was added with the second edition (1642).

• 1. Conception of Knowledge
  • 1.1 Analysis of Perfect Knowledge
  • 1.2 Internalism and Justification
  • 1.3 Methodist Approach
  • 1.4 Innate Ideas
• 2. The Methods: Foundationalism and Doubt
  • 2.1 Foundationalism
  • 2.2 Method of Doubt
• 3. First Meditation Doubting Arguments
  • 3.1 Dreaming Doubts
  • 3.2 Evil Genius Doubt
• 4. The Cogito and Doubt
  • 4.1 Cogito Ergo Sum
  • 4.2 Does the Cogito count as (Atheist-Available) Perfect Knowledge?
  • 4.3 How Indirectly to Doubt Clear and Distinct Perception
• 5. C&D Rule and the Road to Perfect Knowledge
  • 5.1 Clarity and Distinctness as a Provisional Truth Rule
  • 5.2 Strategy for Constructive Proofs Moving Forward
  • 5.3 Fourth Meditation Proof of the C&D Rule
• 6. Perfect Knowledge, Circularity, and Truth
  • 6.1 The Cartesian Circle
  • 6.2 Self-Evident God Interpretation
  • 6.3 Another Cartesian Circle?
  • 6.4 Is Truth a Condition of Perfect Knowledge?
• 7. Proving an External Material World
  • 7.1 Case for the Externality of the Causes of Sensation
  • 7.2 Case for the Materiality of the Causes of Sensation
• 8. Perfect Knowledge of Being Awake
• 9. Self-Knowledge
  • 9.1 That Mind is Better-Known than Body
  • 9.2 Whether We Perfectly Know Our Own Minds
• Bibliography
  • Primary Sources
  • Secondary Sources
• Academic Tools
• Other Internet Resources
• Related Entries

---