blog




  • Essay / The madness of René Descartes' speech on method and...

    The madness of René Descartes' speech on method and meditations on first philosophyTo embark on his quest for truth, Descartes first elaborates his four rules which must serve as a solid basis for everything he understands. These rules are evaluated here based on what they do not take into consideration. The rules are examined individually and consecutively, and therefore are also reminded in order to be clear about them. Furthermore, the approach of using these rules is also analyzed to some extent. Ultimately, however, I suspect that Descartes' four rules are not as strong a foundation as he claims, but fail to take into account the key issues that are noted here. Descartes' first rule deals with the notion of truth and states it as follows: .The first [rule] was to never accept as true something that I did not clearly know to be true; that is to say, carefully to avoid hasty judgments and prejudices; and to include nothing more in my judgments than what presented itself to my mind so clearly and distinctly that I had no need to doubt it. (11) In essence, we must accept only what is true. This raises the question of how one can even know the truth. For Descartes, the certain truth is “I think, therefore I am”, which is his first principle. However, even if it is a certain truth, how can we know if anything else is true? But more importantly, the first rule states that one should not accept anything that can be doubted, or only accept what is beyond doubt. But how can anything be indubitable, except perhaps Descartes' first principle, and even there some can find fault? It seems doubtful that anything can be proven beyond any reason...... middle of paper ......, so there is nothing that is easier to know than a other. Descartes' use of this approach is a false foundation because he fails to see these complications. The underlying fragility of these rules is that they assume absolute truths, without exceptions. I don't know any absolute truth and I don't know anyone who does. But more importantly, this approach would be much more effective if it were an inductive method and not a deductive one. With an inductive method, Descartes could not be refuted by a single example, and he would not need to account for all contested situations. It seems doubtful that an absolutely deductive method could ever exist, based on the limits of human knowledge.Works CitedRené Descartes. Discourse on the method and meditations on first philosophy. 4th edition. Trans. Donald A. Cress. Indianapolis: Hackett, 1998.