Philosophy Test 2

Method of doubt (state the two rules) (class notes; Descartes, 143)

Treat as false any belief that is at all doubtful

Instead of evaluating individual beliefs, I’ll attack the foundations on which the beliefs rest upon.

What is Dream doubt?

Since dreams feel real and vivid, we cannot trust our senses.

What is defective nature doubt?

if we were created by an all-powerful being, who still makes errors in judgment, then his nature might be flawed or defective. This raises the possibility that even his most basic reasoning could be unreliable

René Descartes

Wanted to rebuild his beliefs. Did this through his method of doubt, dream doubt, and defective nature doubt. He thinks he can prove that he exists, I’m a thinking thing, that God exists, that god would not decieve, that body exists, and that mind and body are separable.

Descartes's Dream Doubt argument

1. 1. My sensations of the world around me COULD be a dream.

2. 2. Dreams are fake.

3. 3. So (by 1, 2), my sensations of the world around me COULD be fake.

Descartes's Defective Nature Doubt argument

1. 1. I was either (A) made by a perfect, omnipotent God, or (B) I was not.

2. 2. If (A), God could have made me go wrong about my senses and about things like 2+3=5, squares have four sides.

3. 3. If (B), my creator was less than perfect.

4. 4. The more likely I’m wrong about my senses, 2+3=5, etc.

5. 5. So, (by 1,2,3,4) whether God made me or not, I could be wrong about everything. 

Descartes argument for God’s existence:

1. 1. If I have created an idea that I could not have created, then something besides me must have created it, i.e. something else must exist.

2. 2. My idea of God is an idea of a “most perfect being” - an actually infinite being that is perfect in all ways

3. 3. That no finite, imperfect being (including me) could create this idea of God.

4. 4. So by (1, 2, 3) an infinite, perfect being must have created it. 

5. 5. So by (1, 4) God must exist

Descartes's argument that mind and body are "completely distinct"

1. 1. If I can conceive of two things existing separately from each other, God can separate them. 

2. 2. I can clearly conceive of mind as a thinking, unextended thing. 

3. 3. I can clearly conceive a body (if it exists) as completely different from mind: As an extended, unthinking thing. 

4. 4. So (by 2, 3) I can conceive of mind and body separate from each other. 

5. 5. So by (1, 4) God can separate mind from body.

What "foundations" hold up our beliefs?

Our senses and judgment.

Explain Descartes's overall project: his goal, the obstacle he faces, and how he proposes to overcome his doubts

Goal: firm foundation for knowledge—one that is absolutely certain and immune to doubt. The obstacle was that his existing beliefs could be false. His solution is through radical doubt, rejecting anything that can be questioned, proving God’s existence.

how sure does Descartes have to be of something before he can say he knows it? (cf. Descartes, 143). What historical reasons help explain why he is so strict (cf. Bailey, 135-6)?

Descartes requires absolute certainty. Some historical reasons include The Scientific Revolution during the 17th century. When we realized that the Earth isn’t the center of the universe.

1. Explain why Descartes is certain he exists (third paragraph of M2, 146).

He is certain that he exists because even if he doubts everything, the very act of doubting proves his existence. If he is being deceived then SOMETHING is being deceived.

Explain why Descartes believes he is a "thinking thing." What does Descartes say a thinking thing is (beginning of 148)?

He believes that he is a thinking thing because it is the one activity that he cannot doubt. A “Thinking thing” is something that doubts, understands, affirms, denies, wills, refuses, and also imagines and senses.”

Explain why proving God exists and is no deceiver would be an appropriate strategy for getting rid of Defective Nature Doubt. To do this, first explain why it should work (if it could be done). Then, explain why why it would be better than the other strategy we discussed in class.

Proving that God exists and that he isn’t a deceiver would mean that Descartes could trust his senses. It would work because a Willingness to deceive shows malice or weakness, or both. Malice and weakness are imperfections. God has no imperfections. So (by 1, 2, 3) God would not deceive. This is better than the other strategy because you only have to prove one unfalsifiable claim instead of two (proving God exists and I’m not naturally defective), which is less complicated.

Explain at least one objection to Descartes's argument that God exists

Descartes says that “I might be wrong every time” whenever he is counting numbers or observing something. So whatever he is doing or thinks could be mistaken. Arguing that God exists takes a lot of thought, more than counting numbers. So if he cannot be sure that he is correct when doing something simple like counting numbers, he can’t be sure that his own argument for God is valid.

What if matter and energy were all that exists?

If matter and energy were all that existed then that would mean that we as humans have no free will because matter and energy obey properties. Since we are also made up of matter and energy, we to obey properties and have no free will. This could mean that there is no moral responsibility then either because we aren’t responsible for our actions.

Explain Descartes's motives for wanting to show that mind and body are "completely distinct"

Wants to show that there’s more than one kind of stuff (substance) in the universe. This would show that freedom is possible because not everything is made of matter. It would also show that there is a reason to be good if there was an afterlife to be judged in.  

Identify what Descartes thinks are the main properties of mind and the main properties of matter

Mind: thinking, unextended, indivisible
Body: extended, unthinking, divisible.

Mind/body problem

If the mind and body seem to differ so much, it’s hard to see how they interact. Yet they seem to interact. How can we explain this? This matters because of Decartes argument that mind and body are sepa

What is Interactionist dualism?

Mind and body both exist and interact with each other, even if we cannot explain how.

What is Monism?

mind and body may appear to interact, but they do not really interact, because only one substance exists.

What is Immaterialist monism?

Everything is mental/spiritual; material substance does not exist, and therefore mind and body cannot interact.

What is Intuitive knowledge?

We can know for sure without any argument

What is Demonstrative knowledge?

We can know for certain, but it’s not obvious and requires demonstration (deductive argument).

What is Sensitive knowledge?

Not known for certain, but it is sure enough that we should call it knowledge. 

Descartes's argument that corporeal things exist

1. I perceive ideas of (what seem to be) material things. 

2. There must be some cause, in me or outside me, for why I have these perceptions. 

3. I don’t have to be the cause of these perceptions.

4. My perceptions of what appear to be material things happen “without my cooperation and often even against my will.”

5. So (by 2, 3, 4), the cause of my perceptions of what appear to me material things must be outside me. 

6. The cause of my perceptions of material things is either
   (a) “a body, ...or”
   (b) “God, or”
   (c) “some other creature nobler than the body....”
   

7. God has not made me able to tell if the cause of my perceptions is (b) or (c).

8. God has given me a “powerful tendency” to believe my perceptions are caused by material things.

9. So (by 6, 7, 8) if the cause of my perceptions were anything other than material things, God would be a deceiver. 

10. But God is not a deceiver (per M4).

11. So, material things exist.

Locke's argument that material things exist

1. My senses tell me what’s pleasant and what’s painful so I can survive

2. We only get sensations through working sense organs (eyes, ears, etc). That only happens when we are near the things we sense.

3. Sensations happen against my will - They’re not up to me

4. A sensation may come with pleasure or pain, but the memory of that sensation doesn’t bring that pleasure or pain

5. Senses can be corroborated by other senses/people

Explain at least two objections to Descartes's argument that material things exist

Descartes has not proved that everything must have a cause. For premise number 8, Descartes has not shown that it’s God that gave him this tendency. So, Descartes’s own Method of Doubt requires him to treat this premise as false.

Explain how Descartes' standard for what counts as knowledge differs from Locke's

Descartes is all or nothing, absolute or false knowledge. Locke has three levels. Intuitive knowledge, Demonstrative knowledge, and Sensitive knowledge. They are an inductive argument.

Identify at least two problems with Locke's arguments that material things exist.

Even when we follow our senses, they can lead us to death (eating a poisonous mushroom). Locke also presupposes that material sense organs exist. 

John Locke

Wanted to find knowledge but doesn’t demand perfect certainty. He used degrees of knowledge. He also argued that material things exist using his senses.

St. Thomas Aquinas

Aquinas offered five ways to argue for God's existence. His First Way was a cosmological argument that God must be the first mover.