Descartes’ Meditations

Meditation One: Concerning Those Things Which Can Be Called Into

Doubt

Section 18• Descartes realizes his opinions may be false.• He feels compelled to “raze” his prior

knowledge to the ground and build it back up (Yoda-like).

• This task is enormous, so he waits until later in life to undertake it.

• He begins his assault on his opinions.

Section 19• Descartes will throw any opinion away if it has

the slightest bit of doubt, which they all do.• Everything he has known has come through

his senses, which have been wrong before.• Senses have been accurate, but how can we

tell we are not insane or dreaming?

Section 20• Descartes assumes he is dreaming.• Even if dreaming, things must have an origin

for your mind to conceive them.• For example (mine), you cannot dream about

a tree if you have never seen a tree.• Descartes uses the analogy of a painter.

Section 21• From this he concludes that anything dealing

with composite things must be called into doubt (i.e. Astronomy, physics, medicine).

• Math does not have to be doubted.• 2+3=5 and a square has 4 sides whether

asleep or awake.

Section 21 Continued

• Admits belief in God that created him.• Assume everything about God is fiction.• Must call God into doubt.

Section 22

• He must always be mindful of these doubts.• Opinions keep returning, weighing him down.• Better to have complete distrust than trust

anything.

Section 23

• Concludes by saying he will assume God is trying to deceive him.

• He says this task is tiring and overwhelming.

Meditation One: Focus Questions• Can we trust our senses? How are they useful

to our knowledge of “self”? Is he right?• How do we know this is reality?• Is mankind happily ignorant?• Are we composed of our biases? How do

these biases affect us? Where do they come from? Can we get rid of them?

Meditation Two

Concerning the Nature of the Human Mind: That It Is Better Known Than the Body

Caution!• Descartes is essentially thinking out loud. At

times, he may seem to be contradicting previous statements. This might be caused by a change in his thinking.

Sections 24-25• Begins by summarizing his points in

Meditation One about doubts.• Even if senses are false and God is a deceiver,

he must exist since he thinks (I think, I exist).• Proceeds to determine what he is.

Section 26

• He used to think he was made of arms, legs, hands, etc.

• He makes a distinction of his body and soul (Duality*).

• Says that sensing and thinking are not part of body, but of soul.

Section 27

• He contemplates his body, but cannot bring himself to believe they exist.

• Admits sensing cannot happen without body.• Concludes he is a thinking thing.

Section 28• He is nothing physical since he assumes they are

all false.• He will focus only on things known to him.• Whatever he is, it is not dependant on those

things unknown to him.• Concludes he is a thing that doubts, understands,

affirms, denies, wills, imagines, and senses.

Section 29• Reaffirms that even if a deceiving God exists, it

is still “I” that is thinking.• If he is dreaming, then his senses are false.

However, since he thinks he senses these things, his senses are part of his thinking.

Section 30• He will attempt to contemplate corporeal things

(i.e. bodies).• Uses wax as his “body.”• The wax has the qualities you would expect.• The wax changes when brought close to fire; yet,

the wax remains wax despite changing properties.

• He knows this not through his senses since his senses “sensed” its original form.

Section 31• He knows the wax has innumerable changes

possible even though his imagination cannot process these changes.

• Therefore, his mind judges the qualities of the wax.

• The mind’s inspection can be weak or strong depending on how closely the inspection is.

Section 32

• Since you describe the wax as was instead of describing its properties (as he would a man), his mind concludes the wax is wax, not his senses.

Sections 33-34• By knowing the wax, or any body, one comes

to know themselves even greater.• Objects (i.e. bodies) are perceived not through

senses but by the intellect.

Meditation Two: Focus Questions• Are we separated by body and mind? Is our

mind separate from our body?• How do you define man? Are we more than a

thinking thing? Is someone in a coma no longer a man?

• Is it our mind or senses that give us knowledge of a body? How might they work together rather than separately?

Meditation Three

Concerning God, That He Exists

Part 1

Section 35-36• Reaffirms his conclusions from Meditation

Two.• Whatever he perceives clearly and distinctly

must be true.• Must inquire whether God exists; if not, he

can never be certain of anything.

Section 37• Makes classifications:– Ideas : Man, sky, etc.– Volitions, Emotions, or Judgments : Idea PLUS

something beyond the idea, such as a fear, affirmation, or denial.

Section 38• Ideas cannot be false.• Judgments can be false if I judge the idea to

conform with certain things outside me.• Adventitious things (coming from outside)

definitely come from outside and not within.• These feelings come even if he wills against it.

Section 39• Cannot put faith in natural impulses because

they have led him astray before.• Even if outside ideas do not come from within,

it does not follow necessarily that they are produced from things outside.

• They may be produced by something unknown to him.

Section 40• Even if these ideas do come from outside of

me, it does not mean they resemble those things (i.e. in reality a fire may not actually emit heat).

• Sun example – Math vs. Senses – Senses perceive the sun least resembling of its reality.

• Ergo, blind impulse, not judgment, formed basis of belief that things outside him send images of themselves.

Meditation Three: Part 1 Focus Questions

• How might Descartes be mistaken in his assertion that no idea may be false? Are there moments when ideas are false?

• How might common sense provide criticism for Descartes? Can common sense (i.e. impulses) be a philosophical concept?

• How might Descartes contradict himself with the sun example?

Part 2

Section 41• There is as much reality in the cause as in the

effect (i.e. if a thing exists, then the product of that thing exists).

• Ergo, something cannot come from nothing.• Ergo, again, he cannot possess the thought of

a stone (or any thing) without that thing existing somewhere in reality.

Section 42• All ideas stem from one another, but there is

no infinite regress.• If you go back through ideas long enough, you

will eventually get to one archetype of that idea.

• Ideas in you are images of a greater, perfect thing from which your ideas were drawn.

Section 42 Cont…• He cannot be the cause of an idea

(assumption).• Therefore, he must not be alone in this world.• Something which is the cause of his ideas also

exists.

Section 43• His ideas consist of himself, God, corporeal things,

angels, animals and men.• Ideas about men, animals, or angels can originate

from ideas of himself, corporeal things or God (assumption).

• Ideas of corporeal things cannot originate from him because he can never be sure about their qualities.

• Heat/Cold Example (absence of heat = cold, or absence of cold = heat?).

Section 44• The little he does know about corporeal things

can come from ideas within him.• About the other ideas of a corporeal object he

does not know (i.e. extension, shape, position, motion) may not be in him formally, but they may be in him eminently because he is a substance, and the other ideas are modes.

Section 44 Definitions• Substance- Anything that is self-subsisting.• Principal Attribute- The attribute of a

substance that makes it a substance.• Mode- Any other attribute that is NOT the

Principal Attribute.

Section 45• Must determine if any trait of God could have

come from within.• God to him is infinite, independent, supremely

intelligent and powerful, and created everything.• Since he “probably” could not have come to

those ideas from within, God exists.• He is finite, so the idea of infinite could not have

come from within (assumption).

Meditation Three, Part 2 Focus Questions.

1. Descartes says since he is finite he cannot know infinite. Can we know opposites without seeing the opposite (i.e. can I know cold by only feeling heat?)?

2. Does man possess the ability to conceive of an idea from nothing? Can we accidentally create an idea (i.e. origins of fire)?

3. Can man be the cause of his own idea?

Meditation Three Part 3

Section 46• Clearly understands that more reality exists in

infinite object than finite object (assumption).• Therefore, idea of infinity does not come from

knowing opposite, but rather idea is inside him.

• God must then exist How can he know his defects if not for a perfect being to compare it to?

Section 46 Cont.

• Idea of God contains more objective reality than any other idea.

• The idea of God has is most true. True to the highest degree.

Section 47• What if, though, these same perfect truths are

in me without my knowledge?• I am gaining more knowledge all the time.• If potential is in me, I can at a future time have

all the power of God.

Section 47 Cont.• That’s all baloney.• First, God contains no potential.• Second, nothing can ever be added to God’s

knowledge like it can with mine.• Third, objective being cannot be perceived by

potential being, only actual being.

Section 48-49• Could I exist without this God existing?• If I came from myself, I would not have denied

myself those things I do not possess.• A being is needed to create myself at every

point in my life. There needs to be a cause for me being here now, and that cause is God, not myself.

Section 50• Whatever created me must also be a thinking

thing with same ideas of perfection.• What created me must be God. Or, if a

thinking thing other than God created me, God must have created them, ad infinitum.

• No infinite progress (i.e. you eventually get to God) since that thing also preserves you at every point in existence.

Section 51• Perhaps several units hold various aspects of

perfection, which all came to together to create me.• Impossible since I have an idea of the unified

perfection of God.• (But he HAS the idea of several perfect units coming

together, so according to Descartes, then, that must also exist.)

Section 51 (cont) through 52• Parents cannot be the creator since they do

not preserve me; they merely gave me the matter I perceive to be me.

• Concludes, I have idea of perfect thing (God), therefore God must exist.

Meditation Three Part 3 Focus Questions

1. What assumptions does Descartes make in his argument for the existence of God?

2. What leaps of logic does Descartes make in his argument for the existence of God?

Meditation Four

Concerning the True and the False.

Section 53-55

• Idea of the mind is greater than the idea of corporeal things.

• God cannot deceive since deception and trickery are part of imperfect beings.

• Man errs not because God is imperfect, but because man’s imperfection is part of God’s perfect reality, which we can never know.

Section 56-62

• Will is given to him by God, and it is essentially equal to the will of God.

• Error occurs when the intellect (which is less than God’s) cannot keep up with the will.

• Will has a greater scope than intellect.• Will is infinite, but intellect is finite.• If your intellect keeps pace with your will, you will

complete understanding. Impossible, however, because of the limitations of intellect.

Meditation Four Focus Questions

• Add

Meditation Five

Concerning the Essence of Material Things, And Again Concerning God, That He Exists

Section 63-64• Must analyze his idea of things and discover

which are distinct and which are confused.• When he discovers truth of a thing, it is as if

that idea was in here previously.• Ideas, even if non-existent in world outside of

his mind, were not created by him since he cannot will them to be different (i.e. triangle).

Section 65• Idea of triangle, though sensed, is not given to

him by senses because he has ideas of other ideas not perceived in nature.

• Same is true for God; since I perceive him to exist, he must exist just like the triangle.

Section 66-67• Maybe since I can think of a mountain and valley

separate from each other perhaps I can think of a God who exists even though he does not exist.

• Sophism here (lack of logic disguised as logic).• A mountain and valley are inseparable just as God

and existence is inseparable.• He is not free to think of God freely as he is a winged

horse because the necessity for God and existence to be inseparable forces him to think this.

Section 68• I must ascribe all aspects of perfection to God,

even if at the time I do not consider them at once (much like I realize a triangle without pondering the triangle’s properties).

• He cannot understand how there would be two gods, nor how he is finite, therefore he must exist as a single, infinite, perfect being.

Section 69• Only things I am convinced of are those things

that I conceive clearly and distinctly.• Even if I did not have my religious prejudices, I

perceive God so clearly and easily, so he must exist.

Section 70

• If I were ignorant of God, nothing would ever be certain. My opinions would be constantly changing.

• So God must exist since without him no perfect knowledge could come about anything else.

Meditation Five Focus Questions1. Provide a counter argument to one of

Descartes’ premises in M5.2. Write a thesis statement in which you will

argue for Descartes’ position.3. Write a thesis statement in which you will

present a counter argument to one of Descartes’ premises but then explain how Descartes could logically respond to that counter argument.

Meditation Six

OF THE EXISTENCE OF MATERIAL THINGS, AND OF THE REAL DISTINCTION BETWEEN THE MIND

AND BODY OF MAN

Section 72• Argument overall as to if material exists or if it

is only imagined• First figures out the difference between

imagination and intellect• Declares that imagination requires effort such

as in his imaging of the myriogon (10,000 sided figure), while no mental effort is needed to imagine and comprehend a triangle

Section 73

• Power of imagination is not necessary for living; even if I did not have imagination, I would be the same

• Intellect is looking toward the mind while Imagination is the mind looking at the body

• Concludes the body (probably) exists

Section 74

• Descartes asks himself why does he imagine things better by means of the senses

• He begins by listing all of the senses that he perceives in life

• Senses + Memory = Imagination

Section 75

• He asks himself another question: Can he know that something exists outside himself based only on the information he receives from his senses?1. First, he must perceive an object though his senses2. Them, he doubts his perception and assesses

causes for his doubt3. Finally, he reassesses truth about the object based

on the conclusions he has made

Section 75 (Continued)

• Next, he states that he cannot control what he perceives

• Therefore, ideas perceived by sense are less susceptible to doubt than ideas formed through meditation

• He proves that ideas do not come from himself; they come from within

Section 76-77

• We cannot think of anything that has not passed through our senses

• The body and mind cannot be separated• Questions his perception of objects through his

senses as there is no positive conclusion that they could not have come from any external force

• What he sees and perceives through his senses is not exactly what it may be

Section 78

• Asserts that understanding is not needed to know something exists so he does not need to doubt everything

• He can exist without his body because it is with his mind that he knows he exists

• Imagination cannot exist without a body, but he can exist without it

Section 79

• Since imagination and senses need a body and he did not place them within himself, God or some being must have created them

• It must be God because these ideas are so embedded within him

Section 80

• Understanding comes through pure mathematics

• He does not understand how others could think God is not a deceiver

• He states that God is not a deceiver and so, he has hope of finding the truth

Section 81

• Nature is teaching him, yet God is the one who allows him to understand

• His body is imperfect because nature has told him so (by letting him feel pain)

• The body is affected by objects in his surroundings; his mind is not

Section 82-83• Nature does not teach us but rather we form judgments

based on our senses• Nature refers to more senses because we sense the effects

of something• For example, fire – we can sense heat and pain, but this

reliance on our senses doesn’t allow us to understand the composition of fire

• Ergo, senses given by nature to determine is something is useful or harmful but without the mind, one cannot truly understand the purpose or reason for the existence of something

Section 84

• He speaks about deception. He makes an example with food that looks good but is poisonous

• We are easily deceived because of lack of insight

• Therefore, we cannot be God

Section 85

• Compares a poorly made clock to a sick man• God is the clockmaker that makes us in what

he sees fit• He compares the physical nature to the mind

and how the physical affects the mind

Section 86

• The mind is separate from the body. If the body is lost (i.e. amputated foot), the mind will still be intact and able to function

• The mind is only affected by the brain and more specifically the common sense area of the brain

• Unlike the body that has multiple parts and is divisible, the mind is one indivisible entity

Section 87

• All parts of the body are connected to the brain, which affects the mind

• A part of the body cannot be affected by a part that is distant from it in a different way than it would be if it was affected by any of the parts that lie between them

• For example, take a string with parts A, B, C and D. If D is pulled, A will move in the same way it would if B or C was pulled and D remained immoble

Section 88

• The brain produces sensations that it is able to produce; these affect the mind in a manner that maintains a healthy man

• Sensations are received from experience and are bestowed on us by nature, or it was God’s intention, allowing us to maintain the human body

• Nature of man is composed of mind and body (Duality)

Section 89

• If a sensation exists in the part of the body, then it should be confined to that area and not elsewhere

• All of these senses can be used in combination to examine the same thing to detect falsehood, just like the memory and intellect combine to examine error

• He now believes our senses, in combination, cannot be false

• Rejects previous notions and states that there is a difference between being asleep and awake

Section 90

• The combination of senses, perception, memory and intellect cannot conflict with one another

• God is no deceiver, so he cannot be mistaken in these matters

• But we must recognize the nature of man, and we will make mistakes

Meditation Six Focus Questions

• What, ultimately, is Descartes’ final conclusion? With what assumptions does he make to arrive at this conclusion?

• Create an argument to support one of his Meditation Six premises. Also provide a possible objection to your argument.

• Create a counter argument to one of his assertions and provide a possible counter argument Descartes could propose.