ipl-logo

Cartesian Skeptical Argument Analysis

1448 Words6 Pages

A successful argument is logically and factually strong. Barry Stroud’s Cartesian Skeptical argument is logically and factually strong - it uses a modus ponens argument form. First I will explain his argument (Car-Skep) in support of his view demonstrating our lack of knowledge of the external world and then I will explain his argument in support of a controversial premise in (Car-Skep). I will explain both arguments, state why Car-Skep is cogent/successful, state an argument made by a critic, defend Stroud’s Car-Skep argument with the inclusion of supporting arguments made by other philosophers. Stroud’s argument is successful because it is one that is logically and factually strong. Stroud examines the Cartesian skeptical argument regarding the external world. Stroud states that knowledge is a common everyday task. …show more content…

While assuming these things, Descartes disproves his own argument. He states that one can never know anything through senses, because at any moment one might be dreaming and therefore the evidence on which you are basing your beliefs might be false. Stroud’s argument, in modus ponens argument form, refutes Descartes’ argument regarding the external world. Stroud’s Cartesian Skeptical Argument is: If Descartes does not know that he’s near a fire, then we never know anything about the external world. (premise) Descartes does not know that he is near a fire. (premise) So, we never know anything about the external world. (From 1 and 2) Stroud states that Descartes lacks the ability to prove he is by a fire. In order to refute this claim, both parts of the premise must be false. Stroud refutes premise one, stating that Descartes does not know that he is near a fire nor does he know anything about the external world. Stroud states that things could appear the same way in reality as they do in a realistic dream. In order for Descartes to prove that he is by a fire, he must prove that he is not

Show More
Related
1301 Words | 6 Pages

In addition, due to dreams mainly consisting of objects and events, Descartes believed that there is no reason to doubt general beliefs as much as physical objects as 3+2 still equals 5, and a square will always have four sides (14). As a result of this, Descartes concluded that there is a degree of truth in objects we sense as those concepts must have come from somewhere,

Read More
1654 Words | 7 Pages

However, Descartes is indeed certain of the fact that he is a thinking being, and that he exists. As a result of this argument, Descartes makes a conclusion that the things he perceives clearly and distinctly cannot be false, and are therefore true (Blanchette). This clear and distinct perception is an important component to the argument that Descartes makes in his fifth meditation for the existence of God. This paper explains Descartes ' proof of God 's existence from Descartes ' fifth meditation, Pierre Gassendi 's objection to this proof, and then offers the paper 's author 's opinion on both the proof and objection.

Read More
707 Words | 3 Pages

Amy Mendoza Amanda Hult English 200,Per 3 Syllabus Response After thoroughly analyzing the course syllabus for English 200 I have exposed myself to the challenges, expectations and resources available to me in order to receive the grade I want in this course. Firstly I want to discuss the differences between this English college-level course as opposed to taking English 12 at my high school. One example is all 200 English courses offered through Mendocino college, all students are required to enroll in a writing lab. Which is a free resource available to every student and a mandatory step required to receive credit on final your draft. Which can be completed online or in person throughout the whole week.

Read More
726 Words | 3 Pages

We know clear and distinct perceptions independently by God, and his existence provides us with a certainty we might not possess otherwise. However, another possible strategy would be to change Gods role in Descartes philosophy. Instead of seeing God as the validation of clear and distinct perceptions, rather see him as a safeguard against doubt. This strategy, however, is a problem since it re-constructs the Meditations – Philosophical work of Descartes –.This is because it would not be God, who is the ultimate foundation of knowledge, but the clear and distinct

Read More
862 Words | 4 Pages

In this paper, I will deliver a reconstruction of Descartes’ Cogito Argument and my reasoning to validate it as indubitable. I will do so by justifying my interpretations through valid arguments and claim, by showcasing examples with reasoning. Rene Descartes is a French Philosopher of the 17th century, who formulated the philosophical Cogito argument by the name of ‘cogito ergo sum,’ also known as “I think, therefore, I am.” Rene was a skeptic philosopher amongst many scholastic philosophers of his time. To interpret his cogito argument as indubitable and whether it could serve as a foundational belief, he took a skeptical approach towards the relations between thoughts and existence.

Read More
172 Words | 1 Pages

Descartes, in his Meditations on First Philosophy, used a method of doubt; he doubted everything in order to find something conclusive, which he thought, would be certain knowledge. He found that he could doubt everything, expect that he was thinking, as doubting is a type of thinking. Since thinking requires a thinker, he knew he must exist. According to Descartes if you are able to doubt your existence, then it must mean that you exist, hence his famous statement cogito ergo sum which is translated into ‘I think, therefore I am.’ Descartes said he was able to doubt the existence of his body and all physical things, but he could not doubt that his mind exists.

Read More
1624 Words | 7 Pages

Descartes reflects in the passage that he has often found himself to be mistaken about matters that he formerly thought were certain and indisputable. He then resolves to dismiss all of his preconceived conceptions, reconstructing his knowledge from its foundations, and accepting only those claims, which to him are certainly clear and distinct, as true. All he had previously thought he had known came to him through the senses. Through a process of methodological doubt, he detaches and removes himself completely from the senses. Subsequently, he makes clear his intent to “undermine” the “foundations” of his beliefs.

Read More
1919 Words | 8 Pages

In the sixth meditation, Descartes postulates that there exists a fundamental difference in the natures of both mind and body which necessitates that they be considered as separate and distinct entities, rather than one stemming from the other or vice versa. This essay will endeavour to provide a critical objection to Descartes’ conception of the nature of mind and body and will then further commit to elucidating a suitably Cartesian-esque response to the same objection. (Descartes,1641) In the sixth meditation Descartes approaches this point of dualism between mind and matter, which would become a famous axiom in his body of philosophical work, in numerous ways. To wit Descartes postulates that he has clear and distinct perceptions of both

Read More
884 Words | 4 Pages

In this paper, I will deliver a reconstruction of Descartes’ Cogito Argument and my reasoning to validate it as indubitable. I will do so by justifying my interpretations through valid arguments and claim, by showcasing examples with reasoning. Rene Descartes is a French Philosopher of the 17th century, who formulated the philosophical Cogito argument by the name of ‘cogito ergo sum,’ also known as “I think, therefore, I am.” Rene was a skeptic philosopher amongst many scholastic philosophers at his time. He took a skeptical approach towards the relations between thoughts and existence, to interpret his cogito argument as indubitable and whether it could serve as a foundational belief.

Read More
997 Words | 4 Pages

Meditation is the introspective process that involves the mind turning back in and upon itself, removing itself from the material world and focusing its attention inward. Descartes employs meditation to detach the minds from external influences, to think and analyze philosophy from the original foundations. This brings us to Descartes First Meditation, with the introduction of the method of doubt, he presents his philosophical project and claims that in order to complete his project he needs to question the truth behind all his beliefs. He attempts to accomplish this impossible feat because as he’s aged he has realized the false foundations that he has held onto thus far and the ideas he’s built on them. To be able to tear down these beliefs,

Read More
2041 Words | 9 Pages

Ironically, in arguing that he has been deceived by his senses, Descartes also argues that we can see through these deceptions. I do not claim that we are never deceived, just that we can overcome such deceptions. Therefore we can trust our senses as long as we are aware and cautious. Thus, Descartes’ argument does not validate the degree of skepticism

Read More
508 Words | 3 Pages

Explain Descartes’ method of doubt. What is Descartes purpose in exercising this method? Descartes begins Meditation I by stating that in order for him to establish anything in the sciences that was constant, he would have to start from the foundations of all knowledge. By claiming this, he is adopting skepticism which is not him rejecting his beliefs, but doubting them.

Read More
251 Words | 2 Pages

After reading Descartes' process of methodical doubt, I'd have to state that I somewhat agree and disagree on Descartes' statement that reason is a more reliable source of knowledge as opposed to sensory observation/experience. I believe that us, individuals obtain most of our knowledge by experiencing/observing, however, I also do agree with Descartes' that sometimes what we observe is not true or real, that it is sometimes a misconception. But, just because we have had one or even a few of our sensory experiences mistaken, does not signify or provide reason to doubt all of your sensory observations or experiences. Furthermore, I do think that reason is also is another way or method of obtaining or searching for knowledge, who says that both

Read More
1495 Words | 6 Pages

The Skeptical Argument: Hands and Brains-in-Vats (BIVs) Premise 1 (P1): If I know that I've hands, I know that I'm not a handless brain-in-a-vat. Premise 2 (P2): I don't know that I'm not a handless brain-in-a-vat. Conclusion (C):

Read More
1404 Words | 6 Pages

Descartes and Hume. Rationalism and empiricism. Two of the most iconic philosophers who are both credited with polarizing theories, both claiming they knew the answer to the origin of knowledge and the way people comprehend knowledge. Yet, despite the many differences that conflict each other’s ideologies, they’re strikingly similar as well. In this essay I will attempt to find an understanding of both rationalism and empiricism, show the ideologies of both philosophers all whilst evaluating why one is more theory is potentially true than the other.

Read More

More about Cartesian Skeptical Argument Analysis

Related Topics

Open Document