Talk:Cartesian doubt

Cartesian doubt results in solipsism, the idea that we may be the only thing in the universe. When Kierkegaard comes up against solipsism he develops inwardness as characteristic of the self. His concern with the role of the self in the organization of experience gives us foundational existentialism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:9000:8217:6D18:89E2:6CF1:EEB0:A809 (talk) 15:34, 6 March 2022 (UTC)

Removal of Deletion Consideration
I have expanded the article and am hoping to put some more in tomorrow. Is it still being considered for deletion? RedBaron5142 (talk) 05:17, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Proposal: Merge with Methodic Doubt

 * The issue now is that this article and Methodic doubt cover the same material. Methodic doubt is more extensive but I'd argue that Cartesian doubt is the better description of the same thing. Perhaps this should become a request for comment issue. Nick Connolly (talk) 21:12, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I have proposed a merge for this reason of overlap. Skomorokh  23:07, 27 March 2008 (UTC)


 * This proposal seems to have gone uncontested for quite some time. Can someone go ahead with the merge, then? It looks like the Cartesian section on the Methodic doubt page might need a little formatting and sentence flow cleanup, too. --Topher Hunt (talk) 15:40, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

I agree that the two sections should be merged. It might also be a good idea to merge them with Cartesian Skepticism since it is much larger and what Cartesian doubt is. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.246.148.39 (talk) 05:08, 8 December 2009 (UTC)


 * I agree too. Semifinalist (talk) 20:22, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

Untitled
Often regarded as the first "modern" thinker for providing a philosophical framework for the natural sciences as these began to develop, Descartes in his Meditations on First Philosophy attempts to arrive at a fundamental set of principles that one can know as true without any doubt. To achieve this, he employs a method called Methodological Skepticism: he doubts any idea that can be doubted.

He gives the example of dreaming: in a dream, one's senses perceive things that seem real, but do not actually exist. (This idea is similar to what Chuang Tzu writes after dreaming that he is a butterfly.) Thus, one cannot rely on the data of the senses as necessarily true. Or, perhaps an "evil genius" exists: a supremely powerful and cunning being who sets out to try to deceive Descartes from knowing the true nature of reality. Given these possibilities, what can one know for certain?

Initially, Descartes arrives at only a single principle: if I am being deceived, then surely "I" must exist. Most famously, this is known as cogito ergo sum, ("I think, therefore I am"). (These words do not appear in the Meditations, although he had written them in his earlier work Discourse on Method).

Therefore, Descartes concludes that he can be certain that he exists. But in what form? You perceive your body through the use of the senses; however, these have previously proved unreliable. So Descartes concludes that at this point, he can only say that he is a thinking thing. Thinking is his essence as it is the only thing about him that cannot be doubted.

To further demonstrate the limitations of the senses, Descartes proceeds with what is known as the Wax Argument. He considers a piece of wax: his senses inform him that it has certain characteristics, such as shape, texture, size, color, smell, and so forth. However, when he brings the wax towards a flame, these characteristics change completely. However, it seems that it is still the same thing: it is still a piece of wax, even though the data of the senses inform him that all of its characteristics are different. Therefore, in order to properly grasp the nature of the wax, he cannot use the senses: he must use his mind. Descartes concludes:

"Thus what I thought I had seen with my eyes, I actually grasped solely with the faculty of judgment, which is in my mind." In this manner, Descartes proceeds to construct a system of knowledge, discarding perception as unreliable and instead admitting only deduction as a method. Halfway through the Meditations, he also claims to prove the existence of a benevolent God, who, being benevolent, has provided him with a working mind and sensory system, and who cannot desire to deceive him, and thus, finally, he establishes the possibility of acquiring knowledge about the world based on deduction and perception.

Mathematicians consider Descartes of the utmost importance for his discovery of analytic geometry. Up to Descartes's times, geometry, dealing with lines and shapes, and algebra, dealing with numbers, appeared as completely different subsets of mathematics. Descartes showed how to translate many problems in geometry into problems in algebra, by using a coordinate system to describe the problem.

Descartes's theory provided the basis for the calculus of Newton and Leibniz, and thus for much of modern mathematics. This appears even more astounding when one keeps in mind that the work was just meant as an example to his Discours de la méthode pour bien conduire sa raison, et chercher la verité dans les sciences (Discourse on the Method to Rightly Conduct the Reason and Search for the Truth in Sciences, known better under the shortened title Discours de la méthode).

[edit] Trivia Descartes was very fond of his dog, named Monsieur Grat. This is seen by some to contradict Descartes' position that animals were simply (unthinking) automata made of meat.

Merger with Cartesian Doubt
I created the article Cartesian doubt and I think that this should be merged with it. Both are talking about the same subject, but Cartesian doubt is a more accurate title. RedBaron5142 (talk) 19:48, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I did some editing to Cartesian doubt prior to realizing this article exists. I think Cartesian doubt is the better of the two and a more appropriate title.Nick Connolly (talk) 00:28, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Rene Descartes is one person i look up to in life. Insert non-formatted text here --68.12.174.18 (talk) 02:48, 22 November 2008 (UTC)Tiffani.

If rene was not dead right now, he would be one of the persons i would want to be around. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.12.174.18 (talk) 02:51, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

hyperbolic and cartesian, as well as methodical doubt, are all the concept of rene descartes who believed that grounds for disbelief should be regarded as such in drawing a conclusion from a set of premises. to separate them does a disservice to the information and those seeking it.

Descartes' method of hyperbolic doubt was a means to foundationalism with the goal of certainty. In logic, this method may be used to determine the soundness of an argument; however, as Cartesian doubt, Descartes fails to necessitate the premises of his "clear and distinct idea" thesis. This thesis, by begging the question, is called a "the Cartesian Circle" by critics. Therefore, Cartesian doubt should be subcategorized under the hyperbolic doubt article by Descartes' practice, and given credit by the more accepted hyperbolic doubt by definition alone. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.105.45.34 (talk) 18:20, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Requested move
Methodic doubt → Methodological skepticism — I think is is important to distinguish clearly between philosophical skepticism and methodological skepticism.. Greg Bard (talk) 01:15, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Oops - Didn't realize this discussion was happening and just merged and redirected to Cartesian doubt. Sorry D O N D E groovily   Talk to me  05:35, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I have no major objection to your merge. The distinction between philosophical and methodological skepticism is preserved. I would have preferred the title "methodological skepticism" however.Greg Bard (talk) 05:59, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

The merge/redirect makes the move request moot, right? (So I'm blanking the template to take it off the RM list.)--Kotniski (talk) 11:54, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Dream argument section
The section on the dream argument needs a better example that actually derives from decarte's writing. This anachronistic example isn't great " Subject A sits at the computer, typing this article. Just as much evidence exists to indicate that the act of composing this article is reality as there is evidence to demonstrate the opposite." 184.155.35.132 (talk) 11:26, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

Descartes potentially not a skeptic???
I'm definitely not saying that the Cartesian way of thinking isn't credited to Descartes (it definitely is), but some research seems to argue that Descartes himself wasn't a skeptic. Jason Storm's recent book Metamodernism has a chapter that deals with skepticism ("Zetetic Knowledge" p. 209-236) and he talks about Descartes being the opposite of skeptic. Even Wikipedia's own skepticism page talks about how he was a response to the intellectual crisis that skepticism produced. I'm wondering if there's any way we can touch upon something that explains that here? Quinnkz (talk) 14:55, 26 July 2023 (UTC)