On Descartes

Premodernity, modernity, and postmodernity all refer to the major divisions within the history of philosophy. Each period learned from what came before, challenged the ideas (keeping some), and formulated new beliefs. Various philosophers within each time period are credited for the reformulation of ideas and the insightful truths that has brought the discipline of philosophy to where it is today.

It has been said, that in order to understand where one is going, an understanding from where one came is necessary; so it is with philosophy. An understanding of the troubles and accomplishments of each period will lend to a better understanding of where one finds themselves today. Popular philosophers are influenced by philosophers of old, and the philosophies they propagate can be analyzed by a careful historical search of how each one has panned in the past. As the saying goes, those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it. Dangerous philosophies have been lived out in the past, and people have lost their lives because of it. A study in the history of philosophy will inform how to truly make progress, as opposed to simply making a change.

People in the twenty first century find themselves in what is commonly agreed up as a postmodern period. In order to fully comprehend postmodernity and the significance of its characteristics, as study of the modern period is in order. It is the aim of this essay to do just that. One of the most prominent philosophers of the modern period was Rene Descartes. His influences, convictions, and conclusions are lend to a better understanding of the modern period. This essay will examine the modern period, Descartes, and the philosophies he espoused; both his epistemology and his metaphysical reflections will be examined.

The Modern Period

The modern period refers to the time period between 1600-1950. Following on the heels of the premodern period, which asserted that metaphysics was first philosophy, the modern period reasserted the first philosophy as epistemology. This is why we can infer from Descartes’ Meditations of First Philosophy that he is reflecting upon epistemology.

Philosophers in the modern period began to move away from the premodern concept of the correspondence theory of truth to the coherence theory of truth. While premodern philosophers had understood truth as was corresponds to reality, the notion of truth began to be accepted by modern philosophers as whatever results from a coherent system of beliefs. Though Descartes is considered a modern philosopher, this is one place that he is different. He was influenced by the modern rejection of esteeming reason above all else, however, he used reason as a means to discover reality and therefore to discover truth. This is the essence of the correspondence theory of truth: reality is reveals what is true.

Other modern philosophers esteemed reason as well, but it was done in a different way. Reason and science were valued above all else, and a rejection of the supernatural is what resulted. The very existence of God was in doubt. Many modern philosophers propagated that science was said to be the cause of everything, but Descartes used reason to show that this was not the case. In fact, he reasoned to God being the source of everything, information what are now referred to as both the Kalam Cosmological argument and the Ontological argument for the existence of God (more on this will follow below).

It may seem thus far, that Descartes did not properly belong in the modern period. Indeed, he had many differences than this philosophers of his day. However, one of the defining characteristics of the modern period was the faith in autonomous reason, and Descartes was a master of using reason. Many moderns only allowed for the use of deduction, that is, the reasoning method that guaranteed certainty, in discovering knowledge. Descartes took this concept to a whole new level, applying deduction to matters that had never been analyzed in such a way. As the father of Foundationalism, he advised that we should "always preserve in our thoughts the order necessary for the deduction of one truth from another."

Descartes’ philosophy

In 1596, on the cusp of the modern period, Rene Descartes was born in France. Influenced by scientist and philosopher Isaac Beeckman, he began his own work "meditating on the disunity and uncertainty of his knowledge." In both the areas of epistemology and metaphysics Descartes became very influential. He proceeded both slowly and thoughtfully in his philosophising, and advised his readers to do so as well. He begins his Meditations  with an exhortation to his readers: "I do not advise anyone to read these things except those who have both the ability and the desire to meditate seriously with me, and to withdraw their minds from the senses as well as from all prejudices."

  Descartes firmly believed that "two issues, namely, God and the soul- are chief among those that ought to be demonstrated with the aid of philosophy rather than religion." Through his various writings he strove to do just that, even though he was a religious man himself. Because of this, part of his left lasting impression, both in the areas of epistemology and metaphysics, has to do with equipped the believer with using philosophy as common ground to reach the unbeliever. Both fields of epistemology and metaphysics will be examined separately, in addition to how Descartes used both of these disciplines to formulate arguments for the existence of God.

Epistemology

In his Meditations, specifically one and two, Descartes pens his reflections with respect to the field of epistemology. Epistemology refers to the study of knowledge, which has been defined as justified true belief. One of the characteristics of the modern period was the stronger criteria for justification that it set forth than the premodern period. All three components of knowledge were to be equally stressed, whereas previously belief had held more weight than the need for justification.

Descartes esteemed reasons to be the primary means of justification from which knowledge would result. He believed that ethical principles could be understood by reasons, and that it was the most important thing one needed to get to God. Judging aright and distinguishing truth from error, were what he referred to as reason, or simply good sense.

What Descartes was proposing was no easy task. A life committed to the reasonable pursuit of knowledged "demand[ed] a mind free from prejudices." In order to do this, he developed what was know been referred to as a hermeneutic of doubt, that is, he began by doubting everything he had previously believed in order to prevent him from believing anything unjustifiedly. He noted that "the inexperienced more frequently err on the side of assenting to what is false, wanting as they do to give the appearance of understanding it, than on the side of denying what is true." In light of his observation, he set forth to "never to accept anything for true which [he] did not clearly know to be such.” What it more, anything he found which admitted the slightest doubt, he decided to set aside just as if he had found it to be wholly false.”

After everything had been doubted on principle, Descartes meditated on whether or not there was anything which did not actually admit any doubt. He realized, that though he could theoretically be mistaken about many things, there was at least one thing which he could not be mistaken about. This truth, was his very existence. He realized that though he could be deceived about many things, he could not be deceived about the fact that he was self-consciously aware. He stated that "after considering everything very thoroughly, I must finally conclude that this proposition, I am, I exist, is necessarily true whenever it is put forward by me or conceived in my mind." Descartes famous line, I think therefore I am, came to be known as The Cogito, and refers to this truth deduced from reason alone.

After his existence could not longer be doubted, Descartes began reasoning to other truths, based on his initial conclusion. This manner of expanding his knowledge reflects what he came to propose as his theory of knowledge. He was the father of foundationalism, the theory which proposes that certain beliefs are reasoned to from other more basic beliefs. These basic beliefs can properly be assumed, as it would be impossible to be wrong about the beliefs in this particular category. Descartes would place his own existence in the category of properly basic beliefs, and reason from this to other beliefs. The structure could either end up looking like a pyramid or a tree, if it were to be diagrammed on paper.

Foundationalism can be broken into strong, moderate, or weak foundationalism, and Descartes was indeed a strong foundationalist. This position asserted that "the knower has a responsibility to not believe something unless a high degree of certainty can be attained." Based on the strength of the theory, he believed that it would be "impossible for us to doubt any further those things that we later discover to be true through his method. Many contemporary philosophers today subscribe to his theory of knowledge, though are hesitant to be as strong of a foundationalist as he was. Rather, many foundationalist fall into the moderate category.

Metaphysics

Descartes proposed a type of dualism of the mind and body, which came to be known as Cartesian dualism. This refers to the philosophy of the mind, and is a sub-discipline of metaphysics. Cartesian dualism espouses the idea that the mind and the material body are separate, but yet connected. By mind, he meant the "thinking substances which are nonspatial, mental, and private," and by material bodies he meant the  "extended substances which are spatial, have material properties, and are public."

In his second meditation, Descartes explained that "A body can very easily perish, whereas the mind by its nature is immoral." Philosophers in the modern period tried to expand on his original idea, but as one might guess this proved to be difficult to make sense out of, especially outside of a Christian worldview. If the mind is, in fact, immoral, then how does one account for it after the body perishes?

Descartes’ arguments for the existence God

The conversation at this point necessarily turns to a context of religion. The concept of an immoral soul begs certain questions that can only be answered by invoking the supernatural. Descartes used this platform to launch his arguments proving the existence of God. However, in his attempt he admitted that "the existence of God ought to have for [him] at least the same degree of certainty that truths of mathematics had." He continued to use reasoning as his method for justification, and held the existence of God to the same standard as all other knowledge.

The two main arguments that Descartes contributed to were the Kalam Cosmological argument and the Ontological argument. Both draw off of general revelation, that is, the knowledge that is available to all. Both are also of a deductive nature, satisfying Descartes’ criteria for attaining knowledge. Each argument will be examined separately.

Kalam cosmological argument

The Kalam Cosmological argument is deductive in form, meaning it has the structure: If P, therefore Q. P, therefore Q. This argument refers to the ultimate cause of existence, and reasons as follows: If a thing began to exist, it had a cause. The universe began to exist, so therefore the universe had a cause.

Descartes argument does not end up being identical to the Kalam Cosmological argument, but his meditations, specifically defending premise one, have proved informative for contemporary philosophers such as William Lane Craig to expand upon the argument. In his third meditation, Descartes comments on the justification of premise one. After concluding that he cannot be wrong about the fact the he exists, he further concludes that "there must be at least as much reality in the efficient and total cause as in the effect of that cause...something cannot arise from nothing." If he exists, there exists a real cause for his existence. Descartes deduces that this cause must be eternal, independent, supremely intelligent, supremely powerful, and creator of all. Indeed, this cause must be what we would call God. With this he realized that "it must be concluded that God necessarily exists."

Though he is firm in his conclusion, he continues to expand upon the idea of God, and is able to deduce additional characteristics of God. Drawing off of his own finitude, he realizes that a finite being having the idea of an infinite being can only be due to the fact that this idea proceeded from some infinite substance. He concludes that God is infinite. He also realizes that God is necessarily perfect. He writes, "since I am a thinking thing and have within me some idea of God, it must be admitted that what caused me is itself a thinking thing and possesses the idea of all the perfections which I attribute to God." So convinced of his argument, Descartes concludes by saying that

the idea that I have of God [is] the truest and most clear and distinct of all my ideas...the mere fact that I exists and have within me an idea of a most perfect being, that is, God, provides a very clear proof that God indeed exists.

Ontological argument

Ontology refers to the study of being, and the Ontological Argument refers to the argument for the existence of a greatest possible being. This argument was originally set forth by Anselm in the 11th century. It is also deductive in form, asserting that it is greater to exist in reality than to exist in merely understanding. If a greatest possible being can be conceived, it must exist in reality. A greatest possible being can be conceived, therefore a greatest possible being exists.

In his fifth meditation, Descartes pens his reflections on the ontological argument. He agrees with the first premise, questioning "what, in and of itself, is more manifest than that a supreme being exists?” He does grant, however, that merely from the fact that he thinks of God as existing, it does not necessarily follow that God therefore exists, for he knows that his thought imposes no necessity on things. However, he goes on to explain that because the characteristics of existing in reality would be inseparable from a greatest possible being, i.e. God, he concludes that he really exists.

Though the eternal nature of God was reference above in the Kalam cosmological argument (as a necessary characteristic of God in order to avoid an infinite regress of causation), Descartes was also able to conclude it via the ontological argument. He asserts at the end of his fifth meditation that he can “plainly see that it is necessary that [God] has existed from eternity and will endure for eternity."

Conclusion

Rene Descartes was a brilliant man whose contributions to philosophy, both in the fields of epistemology and metaphysics, will never be forgotten. Rather, they have served to influence philosophy for the better. His commitment to reason proved fruitful philosophically and contemporary philosophers reap the benefit from gleaning from his insight.

In spite of his keen understanding and aptitude for the disciple, Descartes remained a humble man. He would often place himself in the category of those inclined to error. He remarked in his Meditations how amazed he was at how weak and prone to error his mind was. His humility let itself to a theory of knowledge which cannot be beat. He showed how functional skepticism can serve to strengthen the foundation of knowledge for the seeker.

Though the parameters of this essay were limited to epistemology and metaphysics, he 
was also influential in the field of theology. His theological reflections stem from an unbiased foundation, something that is rare in the twenty first century. There is much to be learned 
from Descartes, and encouragement to be found that absolute certainty does exist.