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,
Descartes then attempts to define what he is. He previously believed that he had a spirit and body, by methods for which he was fed, moved, could sense, absorb space, had a distinct area and think. Each one of those methods are thrown into uncertainty except thinking. Since he can think, he should exist. He thinks about whether he no longer exists once his reasoning comes to a halt.
Although, Descartes makes a good claim for doubting our knowledge, he lacks fundamental support for his claims. Therefore, the dream argument is not credible and is not a good enough reason to doubt our perception of the world. Although I disagree with Descartes claim that we must doubt all our knowledge because the world as we know it might be a dream and therefore, unreliable, I do not doubt his idea that we may be living in a dream. In my paper, I will proceed to prove that the fault in Descartes argument is doubting our knowledge of a real world based on our perceptions of the world we live in. Descartes’ Dream Argument is flawed in the sense that we cannot doubt our knowledge because our perceptions (real or not) must come from something that
Notre Dame ID: 902008117 In René Descartes ' Mediations on First Philosophy, Descartes abandons all previous notions or things that he holds to be true and attempts to reason through his beliefs to find the things that he can truly know without a doubt. In his first two meditations Descartes comes to the conclusion that all that he can truly know is that he exists, and that he is a thinking being. In his third meditation, Descartes concludes that he came to know his existence, and the fact that he is a thinking being, from his clear and distinct perception of these two facts. Descartes then argues that if his clear and distinct perception would turn out to be false, then his clear and distinct perception that he was a thinking being would not have been enough to make him certain of it (Blanchette).
“How do I know that I am not dreaming” is one of the main questions that Descartes brings afloat in the dream argument. He wants to know how can it be possible to prove that he is not dreaming while he is seating and holding his piece of paper, and this is what creates a skeptic argument about his perceptual beliefs. In effect, the dream argument is powerful because it depicts how the senses may deceive us while putting into question if it is possible to know what is real and what is not. In fact, it is very sufficient to produce uncertainties about waking experiences. As Descartes poses it in the in the First Meditation, “…I dreamt that I found myself in this particular place, that I was dressed and seated near the fire, whilst in reality
A particularly interesting aspect of Descartes’s skeptical argument is the dream argument and, by extension, the evil demon argument. If we follow the dream argument to its conclusion and become skeptical about the existence of the external world and our ability to draw knowledge from our senses, a troubling conundrum arises. If we consider it impossible to distinguish reality from dreaming and we also consider that a test to differentiate between the two states cannot be reliably performed, then let us imagine a hypothetical scenario where a person is awake and dreaming for an equal amount of time. How, then, do we draw a distinction between consciousness and unconsciousness? Between the sleeping dreaming world and what we consider to be the
In that respect I compare this with the Matrix by stating the humans in the Matrix thought that they were awake, but it was a type of sleep because it was all an illusion and as I’ve stated prior, they were living a virtual life, and that is not real. Descartes goes on to talk about the “malignant demon” and question if all “external things” are basically “nothing better than the illusions of dreams” and that the demon has deceived him. When he seems to resolve that he will stay in his “slumber” he is stating the same thing that Cypher did in the Matrix. Cypher believed that “knowing the truth would make life easier” but he found out that for him he liked being controlled by the computer and wanted to “erase his memories of the truth.” So he wanted to stay in an illusion or a
However, they are not actually happening to the dreaming person in the formal reality. This understanding leads us to believe our senses can deceive us any time and that we can not rely on them to question the reality of something. As for finding an objective truth, that is stable and likely to last, upon which he can base his philosophy (Descartes 144), Descartes must refute all experiences that have a basis in the bodily
For how he can be certain that 2+2= 4 and not 5, how can he know for sure that he is not being deceived into believing the answer to be 5 due to a demon. But even if an evil demon did indeed exist, in order to be misled, Descartes himself must exist. As there must be an “I”, that can be deceived. Conclusively, upon Descartes’ interpretations we can come to decipher that in order for someone to exist they must indeed be able to think, to exist as a thinking thing.
The first thing he does is doubted what the senses give us. However, Descartes pushes his doubting one step further by doubting whether we are actually awake. In the dream argument Descartes is saying that he often experiences the sensations of dreaming while he is awake. From reflecting on this he comes to the conclusion that if he can falsely perceive himself to be awake while he is dreaming then he can falsely believe he is dreaming while he is awake. So, he can never actually know when he is awake or dreaming (Windt).
Why can’t Descartes be certain about mathematical beliefs like the belief that 2+2=4? The truth that 2 + 2 = 4 does not rely on any sensible experience but is grasped entirely in our minds regardless of whether we are dreaming or awake.
The dream argument is presented by Descartes in his book, Meditations on First Philosophy, and is basically raising the question that “what if our life just all a dream? How do we truly distinguish what is real from what is a dream?” (Descartes, p. 334). It is interesting to think about this because if you think from a skeptical point of view, like Descartes is doing while writing these arguments, it is possible that you could put some beliefs into doubt that you normally would not. He writes about “how vivid dreams can sometimes be and how it is possible for us to not be able to distinguish whether an action that you remember was from reality or a dream state” (Descartes, p. 334).
However, Descartes accepts that humans can be wrong by relying on their sensory knowledge, though mostly on small objects in life. Because the senses can be incorrect, skepticism states that it isn't what Descartes searches for. Descartes tries to reassure himself, saying that it his sense must have some truth, since he is not a mad person. However, mad people are certain that what they see is real, and Descartes has just proven that his sensory knowledge can be wrong at times, so skepticism states that he can never be sure that he isn't insane. Skepticism also doubts whether people's lives are dreams or not, as people can confuse their dreams as real
In Meditations on First Philosophy, Descartes declares, “… I see so manifestly that there are no certain indications by which we may clearly distinguish wakefulness from sleep that I am lost in astonishment. And my astonishment is such that it is almost capable of persuading me that I now
He argued that one cannot be sure about the external and internal reality. He wanted to discover if dreaming and being awake is or isn’t the same content. Descartes could not identify a sign or clue to determine if one is dreaming or awake. He believed that things can seem realistic to him while he is asleep. He stated that it can be skeptic enough to believe everything could be false and everything could be generated and monitored by a dream.
