Response- Discourse on the Method

As humans, we are empowered with five senses- to feel, hear, see, touch and taste. Along with these five senses, we are the only beings on earth with the power of thought, contemplation and self-reflection. We can give thought to anything and we have the autonomy to question anything. With the awareness of this, Descartes builds on his distinguished phrase, “I think, therefore I am” in his book Discourse on the Method. Descartes chooses to dispose of all his sensory knowledge because he claims that our senses can be deceitful. Instead, he concludes that all of our thoughts and imaginations are of greater significance because they are what connects our mind to the external world. The fact that we are capable of thought is what authenticates our existence. Descartes states, “For reason doesn’t insist that what we thus •see or •imagine is true. But it does insist that all our ideas or notions must have some foundation of truth…” (18) Through this, Descartes establishes that if we are able to reflect on an idea, then that idea must have some truth in it, otherwise we would not be capable of giving it thought. This does not mean that everything we think is undoubtedly true, it just means that there must be some truth within.

Towards the end of the reading, Descartes compares the existence of God to that of geometric proof, which is something that perplexed me. Religion has always played a powerful role in my life and never before have I thought of the existence of God as something even remotely similar to geometric proof. I feel as though the belief in the existence of God can only be achieved spiritually and through devotion. In a similar way, he describes God as a “perfect” being with no imperfections. However, as we all understand as humans, it is ultimately impossible to be perfect and we all have our equal share of flaws that make us who we are.

One thought on “Response- Discourse on the Method

  1. I agree when you mention us each having our own flaws that define who we are. After all, the world would be a seemingly boring place if none of us had flaws to make us unique. In fact, if we had no flaws, there would not be much to differentiate us from one another, because we would all be “perfect” beings, as defined by one individual person, and would therefore each embody the same definition of perfection. This makes me wonder, if we were all perfect, who would be the individual who decides what is “perfect” and what is not?

Comments are closed.