500:"Thus what I thought I had seen with my eyes, I actually grasped solely with the faculty of judgment, which is in my mind." In this manner, Descartes proceeds to construct a system of knowledge, discarding perception as unreliable and instead admitting only deduction as a method. Halfway through the Meditations, he also claims to prove the existence of a benevolent God, who, being benevolent, has provided him with a working mind and sensory system, and who cannot desire to deceive him, and thus, finally, he establishes the possibility of acquiring knowledge about the world based on deduction and perception.
293:
277:
261:
97:
61:
21:
163:
128:
497:
flame, these characteristics change completely. However, it seems that it is still the same thing: it is still a piece of wax, even though the data of the senses inform him that all of its characteristics are different. Therefore, in order to properly grasp the nature of the wax, he cannot use the senses: he must use his mind. Descartes concludes:
173:
480:
Often regarded as the first "modern" thinker for providing a philosophical framework for the natural sciences as these began to develop, Descartes in his
Meditations on First Philosophy attempts to arrive at a fundamental set of principles that one can know as true without any doubt. To achieve this,
605:
Descartes' method of hyperbolic doubt was a means to foundationalism with the goal of certainty. In logic, this method may be used to determine the soundness of an argument; however, as
Cartesian doubt, Descartes fails to necessitate the premises of his "clear and distinct idea" thesis. This thesis,
507:
Descartes's theory provided the basis for the calculus of Newton and
Leibniz, and thus for much of modern mathematics. This appears even more astounding when one keeps in mind that the work was just meant as an example to his Discours de la méthode pour bien conduire sa raison, et chercher la verité
496:
To further demonstrate the limitations of the senses, Descartes proceeds with what is known as the Wax
Argument. He considers a piece of wax: his senses inform him that it has certain characteristics, such as shape, texture, size, color, smell, and so forth. However, when he brings the wax towards a
731:
The section on the dream argument needs a better example that actually derives from decarte's writing. This anachronistic example isn't great " Subject A sits at the computer, typing this article. Just as much evidence exists to indicate that the act of composing this article is reality as there is
503:
Mathematicians consider
Descartes of the utmost importance for his discovery of analytic geometry. Up to Descartes's times, geometry, dealing with lines and shapes, and algebra, dealing with numbers, appeared as completely different subsets of mathematics. Descartes showed how to translate many
492:
Therefore, Descartes concludes that he can be certain that he exists. But in what form? You perceive your body through the use of the senses; however, these have previously proved unreliable. So
Descartes concludes that at this point, he can only say that he is a thinking thing. Thinking is his
488:
Initially, Descartes arrives at only a single principle: if I am being deceived, then surely "I" must exist. Most famously, this is known as cogito ergo sum, ("I think, therefore I am"). (These words do not appear in the
Meditations, although he had written them in his earlier work Discourse on
484:
He gives the example of dreaming: in a dream, one's senses perceive things that seem real, but do not actually exist. (This idea is similar to what Chuang Tzu writes after dreaming that he is a butterfly.) Thus, one cannot rely on the data of the senses as necessarily true. Or, perhaps an "evil
320:
Cartesian doubt results in solipsism, the idea that we may be the only thing in the universe. When
Kierkegaard comes up against solipsism he develops inwardness as characteristic of the self. His concern with the role of the self in the organization of experience gives us foundational
601:
hyperbolic and cartesian, as well as methodical doubt, are all the concept of rene descartes who believed that grounds for disbelief should be regarded as such in drawing a conclusion from a set of premises. to separate them does a disservice to the information and those seeking it.
606:
by begging the question, is called a "the
Cartesian Circle" by critics. Therefore, Cartesian doubt should be subcategorized under the hyperbolic doubt article by Descartes' practice, and given credit by the more accepted hyperbolic doubt by definition alone.
751:
I'm definitely not saying that the
Cartesian way of thinking isn't credited to Descartes (it definitely is), but some research seems to argue that Descartes himself wasn't a skeptic. Jason Storm's recent book
328:
485:
genius" exists: a supremely powerful and cunning being who sets out to try to deceive Descartes from knowing the true nature of reality. Given these possibilities, what can one know for certain?
695:
I have no major objection to your merge. The distinction between philosophical and methodological skepticism is preserved. I would have preferred the title "methodological skepticism" however.
813:
511:
Trivia Descartes was very fond of his dog, named Monsieur Grat. This is seen by some to contradict Descartes' position that animals were simply (unthinking) automata made of meat.
760:
page talks about how he was a response to the intellectual crisis that skepticism produced. I'm wondering if there's any way we can touch upon something that explains that here?
508:
dans les sciences (Discourse on the Method to Rightly Conduct the Reason and Search for the Truth in Sciences, known better under the shortened title Discours de la méthode).
194:
on Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the
828:
818:
430:
I agree that the two sections should be merged. It might also be a good idea to merge them with Cartesian Skepticism since it is much larger and what Cartesian doubt is.
78:
268:
138:
808:
833:
756:
has a chapter that deals with skepticism ("Zetetic Knowledge" p. 209-236) and he talks about Descartes being the opposite of skeptic. Even Knowledge (XXG)'s own
231:
798:
823:
788:
221:
284:
142:
411:
This proposal seems to have gone uncontested for quite some time. Can someone go ahead with the merge, then? It looks like the Cartesian section on the
300:
146:
803:
196:
793:
783:
733:
437:
332:
186:
133:
613:
587:
566:
108:
67:
712:
The merge/redirect makes the move request moot, right? (So I'm blanking the template to take it off the RM list.)--
347:
I have expanded the article and am hoping to put some more in tomorrow. Is it still being considered for deletion?
650:— I think is is important to distinguish clearly between philosophical skepticism and methodological skepticism..
737:
114:
441:
682:
617:
591:
570:
555:
387:
609:
583:
433:
324:
532:
457:
352:
420:
40:
on November 15, 2010. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see
416:
504:
problems in geometry into problems in algebra, by using a coordinate system to describe the problem.
382:
is the better description of the same thing. Perhaps this should become a request for comment issue.
96:
60:
33:
713:
397:
47:
717:
700:
672:
655:
551:
383:
765:
528:
481:
he employs a method called Methodological Skepticism: he doubts any idea that can be doubted.
453:
348:
178:
523:
and I think that this should be merged with it. Both are talking about the same subject, but
634:
580:
If rene was not dead right now, he would be one of the persons i would want to be around.
668:
547:
543:
524:
520:
379:
37:
641:
469:
412:
375:
371:
363:
292:
276:
260:
777:
696:
651:
761:
565:
Rene Descartes is one person i look up to in life.Insert non-formatted text here--
667:- Didn't realize this discussion was happening and just merged and redirected to
757:
191:
168:
71:
769:
741:
721:
704:
687:
659:
621:
595:
574:
559:
536:
461:
445:
424:
402:
391:
356:
336:
190:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to
415:
page might need a little formatting and sentence flow cleanup, too. --
162:
127:
493:
essence as it is the only thing about him that cannot be doubted.
74:
90:
55:
15:
291:
275:
259:
646:
42:
28:
550:
is the better of the two and a more appropriate title.
396:
I have proposed a merge for this reason of overlap.
242:
83:Keep, without ruling out merge with Methodic doubt
546:prior to realizing this article exists. I think
814:Mid-importance philosophy of science articles
8:
200:about philosophy content on Knowledge (XXG).
46:; for the discussion at that location, see
322:
239:
122:
829:Mid-importance Modern philosophy articles
819:Philosophy of science task force articles
732:evidence to demonstrate the opposite."
370:The issue now is that this article and
329:2603:9000:8217:6D18:89E2:6CF1:EEB0:A809
124:
94:
809:C-Class philosophy of science articles
747:Descartes potentially not a skeptic???
468:Refactored discussion from merge with
206:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Philosophy
834:Modern philosophy task force articles
378:is more extensive but I'd argue that
7:
799:Mid-importance epistemology articles
184:This article is within the scope of
113:It is of interest to the following
824:C-Class Modern philosophy articles
789:Mid-importance Philosophy articles
14:
343:Removal of Deletion Consideration
804:Epistemology task force articles
171:
161:
126:
95:
59:
19:
226:This article has been rated as
209:Template:WikiProject Philosophy
66:This article was nominated for
1:
794:C-Class epistemology articles
722:11:54, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
705:05:59, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
688:05:35, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
660:01:15, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
622:18:20, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
596:02:51, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
575:02:48, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
462:20:22, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
637:|Methodological skepticism}}
446:05:08, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
425:15:40, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
784:C-Class Philosophy articles
515:Merger with Cartesian Doubt
850:
560:00:28, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
537:19:48, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
527:is a more accurate title.
403:23:07, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
392:21:12, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
357:05:17, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
232:project's importance scale
770:14:55, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
647:Methodological skepticism
374:cover the same material.
337:15:34, 6 March 2022 (UTC)
299:
283:
267:
238:
225:
156:
121:
742:11:26, 19 May 2023 (UTC)
243:Associated task forces:
727:Dream argument section
542:I did some editing to
519:I created the article
296:
280:
264:
187:WikiProject Philosophy
103:This article is rated
362:Proposal: Merge with
295:
285:Philosophy of science
279:
263:
107:on Knowledge (XXG)'s
26:The contents of the
212:Philosophy articles
297:
281:
265:
197:general discussion
109:content assessment
680:
612:comment added by
586:comment added by
436:comment added by
339:
327:comment added by
321:existentialism.
318:
317:
314:
313:
310:
309:
306:
305:
301:Modern philosophy
179:Philosophy portal
89:
88:
54:
53:
841:
685:
678:
677:
649:
638:
624:
598:
448:
400:
250:
240:
214:
213:
210:
207:
204:
181:
176:
175:
174:
165:
158:
157:
152:
149:
130:
123:
106:
100:
99:
91:
77:. The result of
63:
56:
45:
23:
22:
16:
849:
848:
844:
843:
842:
840:
839:
838:
774:
773:
749:
729:
683:
673:
669:Cartesian doubt
645:
632:
630:
607:
581:
548:Cartesian doubt
544:Cartesian doubt
525:Cartesian doubt
521:Cartesian doubt
517:
478:
473:
431:
398:
380:Cartesian doubt
367:
345:
248:
211:
208:
205:
202:
201:
177:
172:
170:
150:
136:
104:
41:
38:Cartesian doubt
20:
12:
11:
5:
847:
845:
837:
836:
831:
826:
821:
816:
811:
806:
801:
796:
791:
786:
776:
775:
748:
745:
734:184.155.35.132
728:
725:
710:
709:
708:
707:
642:Methodic doubt
629:
628:Requested move
626:
563:
562:
516:
513:
477:
474:
472:
470:Methodic doubt
466:
465:
464:
428:
427:
413:Methodic doubt
408:
407:
406:
405:
376:Methodic doubt
372:Methodic doubt
366:
364:Methodic Doubt
360:
344:
341:
316:
315:
312:
311:
308:
307:
304:
303:
298:
288:
287:
282:
272:
271:
266:
256:
255:
253:
251:
245:
244:
236:
235:
228:Mid-importance
224:
218:
217:
215:
183:
182:
166:
154:
153:
151:Mid‑importance
131:
119:
118:
112:
101:
87:
86:
79:the discussion
64:
52:
51:
29:Methodic doubt
24:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
846:
835:
832:
830:
827:
825:
822:
820:
817:
815:
812:
810:
807:
805:
802:
800:
797:
795:
792:
790:
787:
785:
782:
781:
779:
772:
771:
767:
763:
759:
755:
754:Metamodernism
746:
744:
743:
739:
735:
726:
724:
723:
719:
715:
706:
702:
698:
694:
693:
692:
691:
690:
689:
686:
681:
676:
670:
666:
662:
661:
657:
653:
648:
643:
639:
636:
627:
625:
623:
619:
615:
611:
603:
599:
597:
593:
589:
585:
578:
576:
572:
568:
561:
557:
553:
552:Nick Connolly
549:
545:
541:
540:
539:
538:
534:
530:
526:
522:
514:
512:
509:
505:
501:
498:
494:
490:
486:
482:
475:
471:
467:
463:
459:
455:
452:I agree too.
451:
450:
449:
447:
443:
439:
438:98.246.148.39
435:
426:
422:
418:
414:
410:
409:
404:
401:
395:
394:
393:
389:
385:
384:Nick Connolly
381:
377:
373:
369:
368:
365:
361:
359:
358:
354:
350:
342:
340:
338:
334:
330:
326:
302:
294:
290:
289:
286:
278:
274:
273:
270:
262:
258:
257:
254:
252:
247:
246:
241:
237:
233:
229:
223:
220:
219:
216:
199:
198:
193:
189:
188:
180:
169:
167:
164:
160:
159:
155:
148:
144:
140:
135:
132:
129:
125:
120:
116:
110:
102:
98:
93:
92:
84:
80:
76:
73:
69:
65:
62:
58:
57:
49:
48:its talk page
44:
39:
35:
31:
30:
25:
18:
17:
753:
750:
730:
711:
674:
664:
663:
640:
631:
614:64.105.45.34
604:
600:
588:68.12.174.18
579:
567:68.12.174.18
564:
529:RedBaron5142
518:
510:
506:
502:
499:
495:
491:
487:
483:
479:
454:Semifinalist
429:
349:RedBaron5142
346:
323:— Preceding
319:
269:Epistemology
227:
195:
185:
139:Epistemology
115:WikiProjects
82:
27:
608:—Preceding
582:—Preceding
432:—Preceding
417:Topher Hunt
43:its history
778:Categories
758:skepticism
684:Talk to me
203:Philosophy
192:philosophy
134:Philosophy
32:page were
697:Greg Bard
675:DÂ OÂ NÂ DÂ E
652:Greg Bard
577:Tiffani.
489:Method).
399:Skomorokh
714:Kotniski
679:groovily
671:. Sorry
610:unsigned
584:unsigned
476:Untitled
434:unsigned
325:unsigned
72:13 March
68:deletion
762:Quinnkz
635:movereq
230:on the
143:Science
105:C-class
147:Modern
111:scale.
34:merged
36:into
766:talk
738:talk
718:talk
701:talk
665:Oops
656:talk
618:talk
592:talk
571:talk
556:talk
533:talk
458:talk
442:talk
421:talk
388:talk
353:talk
333:talk
81:was
75:2008
222:Mid
70:on
780::
768:)
740:)
720:)
703:)
658:)
644:→
633:{{
620:)
594:)
573:)
558:)
535:)
460:)
444:)
423:)
390:)
355:)
335:)
249:/
145:/
141:/
137::
764:(
736:(
716:(
699:(
654:(
616:(
590:(
569:(
554:(
531:(
456:(
440:(
419:(
386:(
351:(
331:(
234:.
117::
85:.
50:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
