Descartes Origins Of Knowledge Essays - Epistemology, Ren Descartes

Descartes: Origins Of Knowledge Descartes believed that the origin of knowledge comes from within the mind, a single indisputable fact to build on that can be gained through individual reflection. In the first meditation he casts doubt on the previous foundations of knowledge and everything he has learned or assumed. He says But reason now persuades me that I should withhold assent no less carefully from opinions that are not completely certain and indubitable than I would from those that are patently false. In order to evaluate and discern what is actually true he divides the foundations of knowledge into three sources: the senses, reality, and context. In the second meditation he has found one true fact I think, I am. Descartes then attempts to discover what this I is and how it perceives reality. The I is a body, a soul, and a thinking thing. It gains perception and recognition through the senses, the imagination, and the mind. He runs into two major problems in these meditations. One is the existence of reality . Two is the connection between body and mind as he defines them. Descartes is clearing away all knowledge that can be called into doubt. By doing this he hopes to create something real and lasting in the sciences, a foundation to build on. This indisputable fact will become the starting point or origin of all other true knowledge he can build upon it. He starts the first argument by attacking the very beginning of knowledge, human senses. Descartes states, Surely whatever I had admitted until now as most true I received either from the senses or through the senses. Anyone will admit that their senses have deceived them at least once. According to Descartes it is a mark of prudence never to place our complete trust in those who have deceived us even once. However, something seen from a distance is much more easily mistaken than something seen up close. The senses show us some things more clearly than others. Descartes then compares the average mind to that of the insane. Insanity, he defines as those who doubt what is obvious to the senses. From this perspective we must give our senses some credence, otherwise we could not function in reality. At this point Descartes questions how we can know that the reality we perceive is true. He likens it dreaming How often does my evening slumber persuade me of such ordinary things as these: that I am here, clothed in my dressing gown, seated next to the fireplace-when in fact I am lying undressed in bed! There is no way to distinguish between being awake and asleep. Perhaps, even now we are dreaming, this not my body, and I am not writing this paper for philosophy but I am really lying in bed somewhere sleeping. However, dreams are based on reality. Whether this hand is real or dreamed, it is my hand, and it exists somewhere. Also, certain things are true in any context. Two plus three equals five and in no context can it be said to be untrue. The power to distinguish cannot be called into doubt as long as we hold that there is a reality whether we perceive it or not. This brings up the question, does there exist a true reality. Assuming that there is a God, he is all powerful, and created this world; Descartes asks How do I know that he did not bring it about that there is no earth at all, no heavens, no extended thing, no shape, no size, no place, and yet bringing it about that all these things appear to me to exist precisely as they do now? Without a guarantee of reality, maybe context, in general is wrong. He doubts the supreme goodness of a God that would let him be deceived even occasionally. And if there does not exist a perfect God then it becomes more probably that he himself is increasingly imperfect. Descartes will assume the worst scenario, that God is really an evil genius. Therefore he must treat all external things as traps and deceptions. By the second meditation Descartes has found the fact he is looking for, I think, I am. The simple fact that