René Descartes Meditations And Radical Skepticism

Descartes’ Meditations and Radical Skepticism

René Descartes was a French scientist, mathematician, and philosopher, most famous for his contributions to bridging the gap between algebra and physics, as well as being recognized as the “father of modern philosophy.” Descartes, a pivotal figure in the rationalist movement, argued against traditional skepticism and Aristotelianism in an age of dogmatism (Watson) and established the philosophical significance of methodological skepticism. Among his contributions to epistemology and substance dualism, his introduction of the concept of radical skepticism was arguably his greatest contribution and has helped shape the world of philosophy as we know it today.

Radical Skepticism Radical skepticism,

In this mediation, Descartes supports the theory of the essence of material objects by concluding that there are many objects, geometrical and mathematical, that exist that neither depend on his mind nor exist in the material world, yet are real and have truth to them. He then explains how a triangle’s properties, or “essences” (such as following the Pythagorean theorem and having three sides), are what make the triangle a triangle. Descartes extends this idea to, again, prove the existence of God by explaining that just as the essences of a triangle allow for it to exist, the essences or properties of God (existence) prove that God exists after all (Perry et al., p.

For instance, according to Descartes’ radical doubt that we can doubt anything that could possibly be wrong, we can doubt his principle of cause and effect just as much as other beliefs. Not to mention, if this principle can be doubted, then the existence of a perfect God can also be doubted since it relies on this principle.

Along the lines of cause and effect, the principle is also problematic in the sense that a cause does not necessarily need to be real for its effect to be equally real. For instance, while the media that portrays “perfect” imaginary characters is real, the ideas about such characters will never be real as it is the media that is real and not the imaginary characters themselves, demonstrating the faultiness of the cause and effect principle.

Another major criticism is that his second meditation contradicts the first. In the first meditation, he strictly emphasizes the use of doubt to confirm certainty in the physical world, yet he decides not to use the same level of doubt to prove different aspects of his existence.