Descartes is one of the greatest philosophers of 17^th century whose books influenced not only philosophy, but also mathematics, and science. Discourse on Method has six parts, however part four is important, because Descartes came to the conclusion “Cogito ergo sum”. Descartes said that people often tend to act on opinions, although one could be uncertain about it. Therefore Descartes decide to do opposite and “to reject as if it were absolutely false…”(14). This kind of epistemology led him to doubt absolutely everything in order to get to the truth. He rejected everything that was previously taken as accurate and precise. He also rejected that truth comes from our senses, since it can deceive us, and decided that anything that came from his dreams was an illusion of his mind. In the process of doubting, Descartes concluded that: ”while I was trying to think in this way that everything is false it had to be the case that I, who was thinking was something. I am thinking, therefore I exist”(15) He wasn’t certain about if he had a body or which world he belonged, neither if he was dreaming or being awake. Ability to think gave him an idea that he is a thinking object not depending on material things. Here he separates the human body from the soul and I agree with him in the sense that the body is material thing that comes from the ashes and goes back to it, and soul has ho shape and form and is metaphysical, therefore it cannot stop existing.

Descartes than continues exploring the truth and conludes that if he doubts in truth, he can’t be certain in it. Therefore, there must be something more perfect then knows the truth other than him. Descartes is trying to answer the question how did he get the idea of heaven, earth, heat, light, if it wasn’t from something more perfect than he is? In other words he is trying to say that he has the awareness of it, but cannot explain it. Many things in this Universe we cannot explain, because the capacity of our mind is limited. He questions himself are those thoughts more superior than he is and there fore did they come from some perfection in himself or if these thoughts were false did they come form nothingness. He conclude that thoughts cannot come from nothing, so if it didn’t come from him they must have come from God. This is the first proof of God’s existence. Another proof of God’s existence Descartes is exploring through geometry. Idea of a perfect being includes existence in a same way that “the equality of its three angles to two right angles or the idea of sphere includes the equidistance from the centre of all the points on the surface.”(17) For many people it is difficult to understand God, because people perceive everything through their senses like imagining, however the God and the soul don’t come from our senses. As Descartes says: “trying to understand these ideas through one’s imagination strikes me as being like trying to hear sounds or smell odours through the use of one’s eyes.”(17) We cannot be sure that senses are giving us the right picture, as we cannot understand anything through imagination without help of understanding it. I think of God as a force that created this world the best way possible and living creatures perfect in their imperfection.

Marija Krasojevic

Descartes was a great thinker, philosopher. To be honest, I have no idea about his philosophical idea until I read this article, I must admit to feeling ashamed. “I am thinking, therefore I exist” (15) which is the main idea through his whole article. Descartes tried to find a thing can above of the individual senses, universal point of view, even in science, mathematics theory of the “absolute truth”. And he found that in all these human cognitions can be reasonable to doubt. My personal understanding about “doubting” is the way of thinking, when I doubt whether I was, I had been thought. Therefore, I absolutely cannot doubt myself if I am thinking. Thinker is a subject, so the main body of thought of “I” must be exist. “Where did I get my ability to think of something more perfect than I am?”(15). Descartes’s answer is “[so] the only possibility left was that the idea had been put into me by •something that truly was more perfect than I was •something indeed having every perfection of which I could have any idea, that is—to explain myself in one word—by •God To this I added that since I knew of some perfections that I didn’t myself have, I wasn’t the only being that existed” (16). Through that quote, Descartes’s idea of perfection is coming from God. For me, it’s hard to agree and understand his belief. I was grown up in Buddhism culture, but right now I am an atheistic man since I began touching science knowledge in school. In my opinion, we can use Descartes’s doubt theory to doubt and assume that God exists. In fact, the result of our assumptions are we don’t have any proofs to prove that god exists. Since we are human being, we absolutely cannot be a perfect man, the God, who is the perfect being in Descartes’s mind. Whereupon we can say that the perfection does not exist, just like I am doubt the God does not exist.

Descartes is a notable French philosopher of the 17^th century. He made huge contribution to both philosophy and mathematics. Discourse on Method written by Descartes is definitely one of the most influential and important works in history of modern science, as well as philosophy. At the beginning of this book, Descartes mentions that all people possess “good sense”, which is “off all things among men, the most equally distributed” (page 1). It’s very important to figure out the most precise meaning of this phrase, because it is the central premise of the following arguments. I was confused about what Descartes means at the beginning. In our common understanding, “good sense” means the ability to make the right decision about something. However, according to Descartes’s following descriptions, I got that “good sense” doesn’t mean intelligence, it means to reason, specific refers to the ability of using intelligence to distinguish truth from fiction. In this book, Descartes attempt to explain his method of reasoning. He claims that never accept anything as true or trust anything that we cannot verify ourselves based on our own observations. Because sense data, awareness, common elements of all possible experience are all dubious. I totally agree on his idea of skepticism and rationalism. Especially in study, we shouldn’t believe everything that others tell us, even knowledge from textbooks or professors. We should doubt, think and tell the truth. In applying the method, Descartes derives the basic truth of his own existence by stating the famous lines in part four “I, who was thinking this, was •something. And observing that this truth I am thinking, therefore I exist was so firm and sure that not even the most extravagant suppositions of the sceptics could shake it, I decided that I could accept it without scruple as the first principle of the philosophy I was seeking”(page 15). He claims the certainty of his own existence. If he thinks, then he necessarily exists. Cogito ergo sum (I think, therefore, I am) later become a fundamental element of Western philosophy, as it was perceived to form a foundation for all knowledge. In part four, Descartes also finds out independence of mind from the body with the lines “I was a substance whose whole essence or nature is simply to think [here = ‘to be in conscious mental states’], and which doesn’t need any place, or depend on any material thing, in order to exist. Accordingly this me—this soul that makes me what I am—•is entirely distinct from the body” (page 15). Then he goes on to prove the existence of God. He claims that God implants perception of perfection in the imperfect him by stating “•something that truly was more perfect than I was, •something indeed having every perfection of which I could have any idea, that is—to explain myself in one word—by •God” (page 16). Descartes’s philosophy is difficult for me, but it’s really interesting to follow his thought path. I feel like solving mathematic problems.

I find it interesting in Descartes “Discourse on the Method” to see the philosophy and reason that Descartes holds throughout the piece. I feel he holds certain “truths” to be inaccurate in my opinion. He mentions in the beginning of his piece “power of judging well and of telling the true from the false—which is what we properly call ‘good sense’ or ‘reason’—is naturally equal in all men. He follows this by saying that people opinions differ because they take their thoughts along “different paths”. I believe that people have natures and inclinations, which leads each individual to create his own judgements. There is no one route of “good sense” that may be skewed by the different paths. I think that peoples’ beliefs’ and natures’ are the products of their surroundings in their initial stages of life. This composes their mental framework in which they begin to make good sense of things. However, it’s not naturally equal as some people are born in the environments of poor moral fiber and ethical standard. So although given a cognitive ability to do so, it is far less likely that they will contribute to the “good sense” that Descartes is referring to.  If you look around the world it is obvious and clear that so many young and old people make seemingly abnormal decisions. Not only individually but as groups and societies. So I believe that when Descartes is referencing this sort of moral standard that is innate to each person, I think there is a deeper level that needs to be analyzed and it’s not necessarily the different individual paths that one takes rather it’s a combination of many different defining roles in ones’ life.

As I hear the idea of “Cogito Ergo Sum” which means, “I am thinking, therefore I exist,” I automatically think of philosophers who come up with their own thought to make themselves feel like a real human being. Rene Descartes’ “Discourse on the Method” discussed the process in which a philosophy was created using the thoughts to grab the human life. I had to read section four a couple of times to grasp the idea Descartes was trying to get across. On page 15, when Descartes mentioned the idea “I observed that the proposition ‘I am thinking, therefore I exist’ has nothing about it to assure me that I am speaking the truth when I assert it, except that I see very clearly that in order to think it is necessary to exist” I think that this idea caught my eye. The truth is viewed as something that is given to us in the world. The world comes full of truths but is it all true? Some of them can be lies that are put into truths for us to believe. Everyone sees it clearly to the point in which lies are not visible and only the truth is able to exist in this world. When it comes to the history of what happened in the past, was it all true? Can we say that it was true? When we learn about the early 1900’s, do we actually know if the information that is given to us is accurate or not? So the thoughts that come into our minds should not be called truths, it should be called our own opinion, as we know that we do not want mislead information to be out there. Descartes goes on to mention about the different elements in which he thinks is needed to create a real human being. He says, “Where did I get my ability to think of the heavens, the earth, light, heat (and so on)?” which made me think of the elements in which a human needs in order to be living on this planet. Real human beings need all the different kinds of elements to come up with their own thought to make they feel more of a human being than anything else in the world. Everyone has his or her own way of making him or her feel like real human beings due to their own train of thought.

Hearing the phrase “cogito ergo sum” or “I am thinking, therefore I exist” brought back memories from world history class in high school when we went over philosophers and scientists. I remember writing down this phrase in my notebook and the fact that he was a great mathematician, but I did not give much thought about it until I read Discourse on Method. I had to read the section a few times to grasp the point Descartes was trying to make. He says on page 15, “I observed that the proposition ‘I am thinking, there I exist’ has nothing about it to assure me that I am speaking the truth, when I assert it, except that I see very clearly that in order to think it is necessary to exist.” I believe he is trying to say that for everything we understand in life in a very clear manner has to be true. Everything we know in life like our existences had to come from somewhere or someone. We could not have created it from nothingness. Someone or something had to influence us or put those thoughts into our mind and this someone or something has to be perfect or why else would we believe them. “So the only possibility left was that the idea had been out into me by something that truly was more perfect than I was, something indeed having every perfection of which I could have any idea,” stated by Descartes (page 16). He believes this perfect someone to be God. This is where I was a little shocked. From the beginning of the reading, I thought he was discussing in a more logical and rational thinking, but then he brings up faith and God. I was not brought up in a religious household, and I do not label myself under any categories but I do have to disagree with Descartes on this idea that God is perfect and all of our ideas and thoughts come from him. He wrote, “It follows that our ideas or notions, being real things that get from God everything that is vivid and clear in them, must be true in every respect in which they are vivid and clear,” (page 17). He then states that if we do have wrong ideas or thoughts, it is because we are imperfect, which in a way I do agree because no one is perfect. I also thought it was truly interesting that he brings in geometry, a mathematic that can be proven and relates it back to a religious figure God.

Rene Descartes’ “Discourse on the Method” discusses the process of creating a philosophy regarding thoughts and their relation to existence. I believe that his approach on viewing everything he knew as false was a very clever way in beginning this journey to create his philosophy. The fact that he focused so much on thinking everything to be false led him to realize that he was thinking, which was something he could not state was false. The fact that he knew he was thinking led him to realize he was alive, which was also something he could not deny. This led to Descartes’ first principle which stated that thoughts are vital in order to be considered existent. From this idea came his next which was that doubting meant imperfection. He also realized that truth meant perfection and because he discovered his first truth, his existence due to thought, he had some capabilities of perfection. This then allowed him to focus on where his perfection came from which he then stated was from God. I am a very religious person and thus agree with his idea of perfection coming from God. In Christianity, it is ideal for each person to live the closest to God’s image as we can. This means we should try our best to refrain from sin, help those in need, etc. I agree with Descartes who stated that imperfection does not come from God. Descartes also mentioned that one’s soul is considered separate from one’s body. In my religion, it is said that when one passes away their body remains in the earth yet their soul rises up to heaven. Because of this, I can understand why Descartes separates one’s soul from one’s body. I then decided to look up what Rene Descartes religion was and discovered he was Roman Catholic, which explains his belief on the soul and body being two separate components. Overall, I found this piece by Descartes to be extremely complex as well as interesting.

René Descartes’ “Discourse on the Method” takes us through a proof-like deconstruction of what it means to have independent thought and therefore exist as an entity. An interesting point he makes is about the presence or absence of a body not mattering in this situation since existing is tethered to a different plane. “…if I had merely stopped thinking altogether,” he writes on page 15, “even if everything else I had ever imagined had been true, I would have had no reason to believe I existed.” From this, Descartes then draws on the fact that doubt exists in his mind since he knows he is not a perfect being yet one must exist in order for him to know this. He defines something more perfect as being “superior,” which I personally find to be an incorrect assumption since there is no one scale to measure perfection, but for Descartes’ purposes this perfection is superior because the idea was “put into [him] by something that truly was more perfect than [he] was (pg 16).” This perfect being is God. It is interesting how Descartes takes a quality like faith, which we see as something almost beyond reason, and connects it to geometry. As Descartes puts it, “the idea of a triangle includes the equality of its three angles or two right angles” is just as evident as “the idea of a perfect being included existence (pg 17).” In his final paragraphs, Descartes discusses how reason even plays a role in our dreams, but dreams do not necessarily signify truth. I find that dreams may often bring more truth than being awake, but it is also true that the ability to reason is a trait that exists more readily in our thoughts during wakefulness. It is fascinating to see Descartes draw all these connections and, while I may not agree or even understand all of his reasoning, I do inevitably agree that our existence is proven by our thoughts.

To me this reading was a bit challenging to follow and grasp. I would imagine that has something to do with the structure of the writing and the ideas that are being conveyed. However a few things did stand out to me. When Descartes mentions the idea of “I decided to pretend that everything that had ever entered my mind was no more true than the illusions of my dreams” (15), I believe there is something to be said about this. We often view certain in truths in life as being definite and proven, however in many situation, truths are but a temporary belief in something that very well might end up being not true at all. For many years Americans held slavery was a truth, they were confident in it. However, now we know all too well, that there was no truth in slavery, it was but a fabrication to suppress a people. Therefore, treating our thoughts as dreams and not as truths, allows us to remove ourselves from the situation and not be mislead into temporary mistruths. Descartes goes on to discuss something even more profound, “I am thinking therefore I exist” (15), or “cogito ergo sum”. I have spent some time discussing this phrase in a philosophy class where we discussed it in the context of proving our very existence. Since we know we think, and one cannot think if they are not, we know we are. After further reading, Descartes mentions “Accordingly this me—this soul that makes me what I am—is entirely distinct from the body, is easier to know than the body, and would still be just what it is even if the body didn’t exist” (15). I understood this to mean, that regardless of the bodies existence through “cogito ergo sum”, we can prove the very existence of the soul, and to me once we have proven the soul extending that out as proof of the body, is a leap I am willing to take.

This was a very strange read for me because I have very recently read a large chunk of Descartes famous book “Meditations, Objections and replies” which covered most of what he covered in section 4 of this reading. Seeing concepts that he spent more then, I want to say, fifty pages to explain getting summed up in a 4 page twin pillar text was quite jarring especially with the clarity and efficiency he had describing these fairly difficult concepts. With strong and intriguing statements like “I am thinking, therefore I exist” (section 4), Descartes seeks to find what can truly be known if reality is put under scrutiny. Descartes statement shows that even if anything else is false, our senses, our memories, or even what we know to be true the fact that you exist is beyond question due to the fact you would not be able to question or contemplate if you didn’t exist. Descartes tries to go  even further by stating “I was a substance whose whole essence or nature is simply to think, and which doesn’t need any place, or depend on any material thing, in order to exist. Accordingly this me—this soul that makes me what I am—•is entirely distinct from the body, •is easier to know than the body” (section 4). This is him trying to separate information gained by the body and senses, which is all put into question because they could be deceived or misinformed, to a purer knowledge based on pure reasoning and logic. This is where i find an issue with his thought process. Though psychiatry was not invented yet, the idea that the mind is purely distinct from the body causes a lot of issues namely when the body can completely alter ones thoughts through diseases that make people delirious to depression and other issues that mess with the chemistry of the brain. I wish i had more to say but if this is suppose to be an initial reaction then i am more impressed he detailed his findings in a understandable essay, I mean he spent a page in a half describing how wax changes its properties near fire as a way to keep in mind he should not assume anything is true. Seeing a person that goes so in depth go quickly through these ideas is simply amazing