Like every other scientist in this world, the great philosopher and mathematician Rene Descartes had always been looking for the primary truth, that could`ve been a fundamental base for any other knowledge. But which statement is so simple, that a person in any place in the world while hearing it, would automatically nod his or her head? All in all, the statement “I think, therefore I am” has beaten any other one. But the question is, why have people, in this case, Descartes, decided to bet on existence, and furthermore on humans being? Why not, for example, to declare Gods existence to be the general truth? Or why not just simply to choose another topic in philosophy? First of all, the philosophical proposition “I am thinking, therefore I exist” had been formulated in 1637. This date belongs to the Age of Enlightenment, when reason, analysis individualism stood higher above traditional authority. Intelligence was highly valued as it meant certainty. Therefore higher standing institutions with Catholic Church including God were challenged and …show more content…
There are other famous assertions, which are similar in that way, for example, “I know, that I know nothing” by Socrates or “Man is the measure of all things” by Protagoras. They are well-known and hold great value, but were more than once criticized and praised, verified and rejected. Barry Stroud once made an observation: “ A thinker obviously could never be wrong in thinking ‘I think’”. But David Hume thought to be possible to pick on any certainty, even if it is thought to be absolute, which he did. Hume’s position is that all of our thinking, our identity and truth is induction and assumption. Hume argued that human thought, identity, and behavior are ruled by the passions, not reason which serves as a tool for desires. When we think much about something, we are passionate. But this particular debate is for Rationalists and Empiricists to