Descartes Meditation

At this point within the Meditations, Descartes has assumed that any or all knowledge gathered from the senses is either a fabrication or a misinterpretation. As one could imagine, there was little left to discourse, but with concepts like geometry and basic mathematics (Med, 21). Concepts of that sort would exist whether or not there was a space in which they could be perceived (Med, 21). In other words, in a space of complete nothingness, equations like 1+1=2 are still valid. However, that form of knowledge is not what Descartes wants to arrive at. His discussion lays within what exists, and what is true within his universe, which drives him to his cogito, ‘I think, therefore I am’. After questioning whether his body exists or if a malicious

As he describes his essence of mind as a thinking thing Descartes writes, “I am a mind, or intelligence or intellect or reason,” (Med, 28). He then furthers the discussion by asking himself what type of thinking thing is he, but before he employs his imagination, he comes to the realization that imagination is just the contemplation of corporeal things, possible deceptions that the body has shown the mind. However, it’s this faculty to conceive of the mind without knowledge gained through the senses that Descartes uses to further the argument that his mind alone truly exists. Through the act of thinking he assures himself that he must be a substance that thinks, but unlike the other ideas he was sure of beforehand he has had no corporeal exposure to his own mind. There is no reason that lies in the world of doubt (the world of the senses) that can be used to support his argument. If he could describe the mind as corporeal, then he would inadvertently disqualify his cogito. It would imply that what he believed as something undoubtable was based on knowledge that was doubtable, which would defeat the purpose of the

It allows us to conceptualize the mind as an incorporeal tool that the body uses to function uniquely within its environment. We can see how the weight of an object is determined by the density, gravitational field in which it’s in and many other corporeal aspects of the object itself, while also admitting that the weight of something is not something we can hold or touch or ascribe a sense of extension to. It makes for an adequate parallel for the mind and body if the mind was as simply related to the body as the weight of an object is to the nature of the object itself. This explanation, however, admits that the body more likely manifests the mind rather than is created with union to the mind. It also begs the question that if the qualities of the body help describe the qualities of the mind then how truly distinct is the mind from the body, besides in terms of states of