Descartes' First Meditation: Flawed Argumentation And Misguided Reasoning

In the First Meditation, Descartes introduces his method of doubt (methodological scepticism), casting doubt on the evidence of his senses to determine whether an external world exists. He argues that his senses sometimes deceive him, and that he cannot be certain whether he is dreaming or awake. He also posits the possibility of an evil genius controlling his mind, deceiving him about the world. However, some critics argue that Descartes' general scepticism about the senses is not warranted, as he provides examples of how we can 'see through' deceptions, undermining his claim. Despite these criticisms, Descartes' First Meditation remains influential, often considered a prerequisite for modern philosophical thinking.

Descartes' senses-based argument is undermined by the fact that we can sometimes see through deceptions

Descartes' senses-based argument is that all knowledge comes from the senses. He acknowledges that the senses can deceive, but only with respect to objects that are very small or far away. On the whole, he believes that sensory knowledge is quite sturdy. However, this argument is undermined by the fact that we can sometimes see through deceptions.

Descartes himself recognises that he is often convinced when dreaming that he is sensing real objects. He feels certain that he is awake and sitting by the fire, but reflects that often he has dreamed this and been wholly convinced by it. He concludes that even if his present sensations are dream images, these images are drawn from waking experience, much like paintings. Thus, he can doubt composite things but not the simple and universal parts from which they are constructed, like shape, quantity, size, and time.

However, upon further reflection, Descartes realises that even simple things can be doubted. An omnipotent God could make even our conception of mathematics false. If there is no God, there is an even greater likelihood of being deceived since our imperfect senses would not have been created by a perfect being.

Descartes resolves to pretend that his habitual opinions are totally false and imaginary to counterbalance his habitual way of thinking. He supposes that not God, but some evil demon, has committed itself to deceiving him so that everything he thinks he knows is false. By doubting everything, he can at least avoid being misled by this demon.

Descartes' senses-based argument is therefore undermined by the fact that we can sometimes see through deceptions. This is most clearly demonstrated by the fact that we can doubt even simple things, like mathematics, if we consider the possibility of an omnipotent God or an evil demon.

Descartes' scepticism is unwarranted because he cannot prove that everything is an illusion

In the First Meditation, Descartes introduces his method of doubt (methodological scepticism). He reasons that, to prompt himself to seek sturdier foundations for his knowledge, he need only find some reason to doubt his present opinions. He identifies three arguments in favour of his methodological scepticism:

• Senses sometimes deceive us
• Dreaming argument
• Evil genius argument

However, Descartes' scepticism has been deemed unwarranted and his general scepticism about the senses unjustified. This is because, in order to make his case, he presents a variety of examples in which he has found that his senses deceived him. To be justified in claiming that the senses deceive, a person would need to be able to recognise when an error has taken place, i.e., to be able to distinguish between being mistaken and being correct. For instance, to know that 'heat mirages' on paved roads are 'deceptions', one would need to know that they are optical illusions and hence what is seen is not what is actually there. But, in knowing this, one is able to see through the deception and thus avoid being deceived.

Descartes acknowledges that, while our senses can deceive us with respect to objects that are very small or far away, our sensory knowledge on the whole is quite sturdy. He also notes that, while he is often convinced when dreaming that he is sensing real objects, he reflects that he has also often dreamed of sitting by the fire and been wholly convinced by it. Thus, he concludes that, though he can doubt composite things, he cannot doubt the simple and universal parts from which they are constructed like shape, quantity, size, and time.

Descartes' scepticism is further undermined by his belief in an all-powerful, benign God who is no deceiver. At the end of the Meditations, he counters the dreaming argument by suggesting that he can distinguish the waking state from sleep by the fact that memory connects the events of our waking life but does not connect dreams with one another or with our waking lives. He also counters the evil genius argument by claiming clear and distinct knowledge of a benign, omnipotent God who is no deceiver.

The 'Dream Argument' suggests that the senses are not always reliable

In his First Meditation, Descartes introduces his method of doubt, or methodological scepticism, which questions the reliability of the senses. He argues that, while our senses are sometimes deceived, we can be certain of truths in mathematics and logic, even when dreaming.

The Dream Argument suggests that the senses are not always reliable. Descartes reflects that, when dreaming, he is often convinced that he is sensing real objects. For example, he might dream that he is sitting by the fire reading, when in reality, he is asleep in bed. How, then, can he be sure in any moment that he is awake and not dreaming?

Descartes' Dream Argument does not claim that we are always dreaming, but that we cannot be certain at any time that we are awake. This calls into question the reliability of the senses, as the things we perceive in dreams—the fire, a piece of paper, our hand—may all be figments of our imagination.

However, it is important to note that the Dream Argument does not reject the senses entirely. Rather, it suggests that they are not always and wholly reliable. This argument questions Aristotelian epistemology, which relies heavily on sensory experience as the source of knowledge.

Descartes' Dream Argument is not without criticism. Some argue that, by presenting examples of sensory deception, Descartes also demonstrates our ability to 'see through' such deceptions, thus undermining his claim that the senses are unreliable. However, this criticism assumes that we are always able to recognise when an error has occurred, which may not always be the case.

The 'Evil Demon' argument claims that the senses cannot be trusted

In the First Meditation, Descartes introduces his method of doubt (methodological scepticism). He reasons that, to prompt himself to seek sturdier foundations for his knowledge, he need only find some reason to doubt his present opinions. He acknowledges that the senses can sometimes deceive, but only with respect to objects that are very small or far away. However, he realises that he is often convinced when dreaming that he is sensing real objects.

Descartes concludes that, although he can doubt composite things, he cannot doubt the simple and universal parts from which they are constructed, such as shape, quantity, size, and time. He also acknowledges that insane people might be more deceived, but he is clearly not one of them.

However, Descartes's "Evil Demon" argument claims that the senses cannot be trusted. He supposes that not God, but some evil demon has committed itself to deceiving him so that everything he thinks he knows is false. By doubting everything, he can at least be sure not to be misled into falsehood by this demon.

The Evil Demon argument is distinct from Descartes's Dream Argument, which suggests that the senses are not always and wholly reliable. The Dream Argument questions Aristotelian epistemology, while the Evil Demon Argument does away with it altogether.

Descartes's methodological doubt is not about knowing that he is being deceived, but about doubting whether what he perceives is true or not. He is not saying, "I know XYZ, therefore I know nothing", but rather, "Look, you say you know things based on principles XYZ. But if we follow principles XYZ to their logical conclusion, it turns out that we can't really know anything after all!"

Descartes' argument is self-refuting because it assumes the non-skeptical position

In the First Meditation, Descartes introduces his method of doubt (methodological scepticism). He questions the evidence of his senses, doubting the existence of an external world, including other people and his own body. He then attempts to reason his way back to knowledge of all that he doubted.

Descartes' argument is considered self-refuting because it assumes a non-skeptical position. In other words, he is not saying, "I know XYZ, therefore I know nothing". Instead, he argues, "You say you know things based on principles XYZ. But if we follow principles XYZ to their logical conclusion, it turns out that we can't really know anything after all".

In this way, Descartes is arguing dialectically from the position of his opponents. He is not claiming to know that his senses are deceiving him, but that it is possible that they are. By doubting everything, he is looking for something about which he can be absolutely certain.

Ultimately, Descartes concludes that the only thing he can be certain of is that there must exist someone who doubts, namely himself ("Cogito, ergo sum" or "I think, therefore I am").

Frequently asked questions