Descartes is considered by many to be the father of modern philosophy and as such his works deals with the aspects of the modernity of life. As I read an excerpt from his thoughts on the metaphysical and the dualism of the mind and body as they exist within the physical and ephemeral realms there were many times where I had to stop and think about how I view the metaphysical. For example: “... I have opportunely feed my mind from all cares [and am happily disturbed by no passions]...”, this is a description of being free through the use of your mind by your own free will which is something that I have done many times before. The reading is entirely observations about our everyday life and what we perceive within our consciousness and unconsciousness. I do agree with Descartes, that the state of being free is first and foremost in your mind and only that person which wishes to be free from the constraints of worry and passion can do so if and only if they choose to perceive it that way.
Not only is the state of freedom discussed within the very first point in the reading, just four paragraphs down Descartes takes the idea of our very body into question. That is, how do you know that you aren't dreaming right now? You could be in front of this text reading it with your own two eyes, but you may just be falling victim to your own imagination that convinces you that this reality is your own reality. There must have been some time when you were “deceived” by the illusions that your dreams presented to you, at that point it’s quite possible that you could convince yourself that you are dreaming that this reality is not your reality. These questions which Descartes posed are indeed a forbearance of the nature of the human mind. We only know the world as it is, the metaphysical is out of your reach until you see yourself as not being in the world but of the world.
(Descartes' Illustration of Dualism)
Asking these questions by themselves result in a sufficient excuse to ask more deeply profound questions. He continues these questions by going the next step and questions the existence of a “God” and even his senses, Descartes says: “...suppose that I possess no senses; I believe that body, figure, extension, motion, and place are merely fictions of my mind. What is there, then, that can be esteemed true... there is absolutely nothing certain”. There is nothing absolute in the metaphysical world, it is what we interpret though our perception of the world around us that makes our reality. Descartes expresses with these words that: “Perception is another attribute of the soul; but perception to is impossible without the body ”, which lies the foundation for the dualism of the mind and body. While the mind perceives the world according to the person, the body exists separately from the mind and as such acts accordingly to your perceptions. Its bring to mind that everyone experiences reality and the metaphysical in different ways. How do you experience reality, and how can you be sure that what you see is the truth?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIn the second paragraph, you discuss Descartes argument regarding dreams and deception. I just wanted to note here that he did mention that the deceptive sensory qualities of our dreams are based upon previously perceived features of reality (colors, shapes, etc.) Though our dreams and our senses may deceive us from time to time, they are still based upon our material reality. Though they are rooted in reality, they may be deceptive in that they are abstract representations of it.
ReplyDeleteI too found it interesting that he had brought god into this argument. He mentioned that this source which had constructed man (i.e god) must have been aware that he had created man susceptible to deception. To me, this part had seemed somewhat critical of God, who had either been negligent or intentionally deceptive in the inclusion of this human characteristic. Really interesting stuff. Opinions?
In reading Descartes’ Metaphysical Meditations, I found the diction that Descartes employed created a unique style of writing that was easily understood by many readers. This style engaged the readers and made it seem like Descartes was explaining his logic to you, the reader, throughout his entire philosophical debate with himself. Even though Descartes is discussing his own thoughts in a one-sided conversational manner, as a reader you are urged to think about how his philosophical ideas relate to your own viewpoint on the subject. You are forced to ponder Descartes’ thoughts on the mind/body debate and consider how you yourself would respond to the questions that are posed by him during these two meditations.
ReplyDeleteIn Descartes’ first mediation, he discusses the skepticism that he has regarding his opinions. In his attempt to better understand the fault in his opinions he decides to “rid myself of all the opinions I had adopted, and of commencing anew the work of building from the foundation, if I desired to establish a firm and abiding superstructure in the sciences.” He does this because he feels like it would be easier to reject the basis upon which he made all of his opinions instead of going through each opinion and rejecting them separately. Descartes then goes on to explain that the foundation of his opinions revolve around the information he has gained from his senses. He begins to think that his senses could be deceiving him and contemplates the validity of his existence and moreover his skewed perspective when it comes to dreaming. Descartes reasons that he can find validity in his dreams, since they are based off of reality, as well as anything in the realm of arithmetic and geometry. Physics, astronomy, medicine and science in general are the complete opposite; one must doubt these areas since they are more ambiguous in their validity.
One aspect I found interesting is the wax debate in the second meditation. Descartes utilizes the properties of wax in order to come to a conclusion on whether or not our senses can be trusted or if we should rely more heavily on our intellect. He starts by describing wax in its solid state and what it feels like, smells like, looks like, etc. Then the wax is melted and becomes a liquid. You can no longer use your senses to determine what the object is because the properties of the wax have changed drastically. One must use their mind to determine what this object is.
This example of wax is Descartes way of proving that he should not rely on his senses but rather his intellect: “I find I have insensibly reverted to the point I desires; for, since it is now manifest to me that bodies themselves are not properly perceived by the senses nor by the faculty of imagination, but by the intellect alone; and since they are not perceived because they are seen and touched, but only because they are understood, I readily discover that there is nothing more easily or clearly apprehended than my own mind.”
Did you guys find any other interesting aspects in these meditations?
I think it’s incredibly fascinating that Descartes wrote about mind-body dualism and the fallacies of our senses long before the empirical studies of psychology today. Much of what Descartes alludes to when he talks about the body’s role in analysing our environment and the mind’s role of interpreting this analysis corresponds to the ways in which we think of our senses today. For the most part, our bodies are the same, especially when it comes to our sensory organs, the skin, the eyes, the ears, the tongue, and the olfactory system. We all vary in terms of our relative abilities, of course. But the process in which our sensory organs receive external stimuli, such as air or light vibrations, and change them to electrical impulses in our nervous system is very much the same. Why, then, do I think that color is pink when my friend thinks it’s purple? Why can I tell the difference between the pitch my friend is humming and the correct pitch in the song playing on the radio when they believe it to be the same? It all has to do with our minds. In order to make any sense of light and sound waves, our brain connects the outside information with previous knowledge and experience. Thus, I know to call the sky “blue” (except when it’s gray which is a lot of the time in Paris). Because this interpretation, what we call “coding”, is based so heavily on individual experiences, we must be skeptical of everything we sense.
ReplyDelete