In Descartes' writings entitled "Meditations on First Philosophy", he begins by reworking his thinking. In fact, he discards everything that he believes can be doubted. This includes a vast array of things; he must discard everything he has ever heard from anyone because humans are imperfect and their words cannot be trusted. He must discard everything he has ever seen, because his senses can deceive him: "I have learned by experience that these senses sometimes mislead me, and it is prudent never to trust wholly those things which have once deceived us" (Descartes, 18). Much of class time was spent debating whether or not it was our senses that truly deceived us, or rather the object being sensed.
For a while we entertained the idea of "our brains being poked by a mad scientist in Frasier-Jelke" who was manipulating what we see and feel, despite the fact that we were actually merely dreaming. After spending two-thirds of the class time trying to explain why we may be able to tell that we were not, in fact, in such a position, one student arrived at a simple conclusion.
"Why does it matter?" muttered one student, much to Professor Johnson's shock. Professor argued that even with the slightest doubt that we were truly alive, it could not be guaranteed to be true by Cartesian standards. He tried to explain himself, saying that even if he was actually dreaming and being manipulated, he was going to go on living his life (or dream) as he was, regardless of any brain poking taking place. I agree with this student. Although we can debate whether or not something is true, or whether something could be untrue, at some point we will no longer be able to continue questioning. Eventually, we will arrive at something that, regardless of whether or not it is true, has no bearing on life as we know it.
I believe that this line can be drawn at the point where the answer of its truth would have to practical, physical bearings in life. Some people in class explained that something's physicality did not matter. I disagree with this idea, because at some point, everything we know comes into play in the real world. The analogy in class about if I lived on an island and believed with all my heart that two plus two equaled five, then to me, two plus two would equal five. Even though I would be wrong, I would never know, nor care, because I would never have to act on my numerical reasoning in my world. In this sense, the physicality of numerical reasoning defines how numbers are taught, and applied. Without a physical basis, none of us would ever have learned how to add or subtract or manipulate numbers because they would be just that: numbers. We didn't learn how to add two plus two just to have some reasoning and knowledge in our brains; we learned it to be able to apply this knowledge when it matters. Therefore, I believe that sometimes the ideas matter because, and only because, they have a physical application.
Dear Will,
ReplyDeleteSurprisingly enough, I agree with the majority of your analysis of Descartes' work. Although it is important to understand Descartes' argument, one must ask themselves how they would apply this to their own life, especially when regarding their own personal search for values. In my own opinion, the only portion of Descartes' work that I found useful was his attempt to prove the existence of God. And I understand that his theory of doubt serves as the basis of his argument, however I have a hard time buying into his style of proof and logic. Descartes uses many "if,then" statements, yet he doesn't allow any room for his logic to be doubted. In st. Thomas Aquinas' "Summa Theologica," Aquinas anticipates his student's questions when trying to prove the existence of God. Obviously, because these are Descartes' own personal meditation, he would not be thinking about the questions of others. However Will, I disagree with your stated that you agreed with the student who asked, "Why does this matter?" based on the logic that it has no bearing on your life. I believe it does. The spiritual aspect of life greatly effects one's state of mind. And, if Descartes persuades one to truly believe that one's life is altered in anyway, then that would definitely have a bearing on their life. Conversely, I do agree with you in that time is wasted worrying about whether or not our brain is being manipulated by a mad scientist, and like Dr. J said, if we truly had a single shred of doubt that the world we live in is falsified, then we would all become very paranoid. Overall, the most important thing to take away from Descartes' work is that his logic is the origin of science as we know, and the only way to truly understand something is to prove to yourself that it is in fact clear and distinct, rather than basing your truths on sensory feeling.
Will,
ReplyDeleteI also agree with your analysis, which may be due to the fact that I was one of the students that took your side in the argument. I believe Descartes' work to be very profound as I too have pondered similar subjects, though not to the extent he did. I believe that if we are in fact dreaming, rather than try and reason about our existence, which I believe only frustrates those who try, we should embrace life. I also agree with your belief about the importance of the physicality of the world. Without physical application, why would we need numbers? My conclusion on Descartes' "Meditations on First Philosophy" are very similar to many TV shows and movies that fail to answer all the questions raised over the duration. I will live my life and probably never fully understand my existence, but I am okay with that.