Foundation of Knowledge

2022202129

René Descartes have been striving for constructing a sturdy framework wherein

knowledge triumphs over doubt. Central to Descartes' endeavor was his unwavering

commitment to skepticism, which he wielded as a tool to discover foundational certainties

rather than succumbing to doubt's paralyzing effects. Through methodical doubt, Descartes

scrutinized the foundations of belief, challenging the reliability of sensory perceptions and the

existence of an external world independent of the mind. Descartes' philosophical inquiry

extended beyond the self, probing the nature of thought and existence itself. By rigorously

examining the notions like the self and the existence of God, Descartes sought to anchor

knowledge in indubitable truths resilient to skeptical assaults. In short, Descartes' pursuit was

to construct a framework wherein knowledge transcends doubt, using skepticism against the

external world, making thought experiments and explaining the roles of thoughts, the self, and

God within this framework. In this paper, I will explore Descartes' argument against

skepticism about the external world, examining his critique of sense experience, the

invocation of the evil genius hypothesis, the distinction between 'I' and the body, and the

significance of his argument for the existence of God in bolstering his foundation of

knowledge.

So far, I introduced Descartes’ objective and his means for essaying to attain it. Descartes

commence his skeptical examination by questioning the external world because it serves as

the foundation upon which our knowledge and understanding of reality are built. The external

world encompasses the physical universe, including objects, events, and phenomena that exist

independently of our perceptions and thoughts. By subjecting the external world to scrutiny,

Descartes aims to determine whether our perceptions of it can be trusted as reliable sources of

knowledge. He contends that our senses are inherently fallible and prone to deception,
rendering them unreliable sources of knowledge. Descartes illustrates this point by presenting

various examples of sensory deception, such as optical illusions or dreams, where our

perceptions fail to accurately represent reality. For instance, the experience of seeing a stick

appear bent when partially submerged in water demonstrates how our senses can be misled,

leading us to perceive things that do not correspond to objective reality. Descartes argues that

even in everyday experiences, such as perceiving the shape or size of objects, our senses can

be deceived. Phenomena like mirages or the perceived distortion of objects at a distance

further underscore the limitations of sensual perception. These instances of sensory error

highlight the fundamental unreliability of sense experience as a means of acquiring

knowledge about the external world. Descartes' skepticism regarding sense experience

extends beyond mere observation of perceptual illusions. He suggests that our senses may

also be deceived by more subtle means such as by an evil genius or malevolent demon

capable of manipulating our perceptions. The introduction of the evil genius serves as a

thought experiment to push the boundaries of skepticism to its limits. Descartes uses the evil

genius hypothesis to entertain the possibility that our perceptions and beliefs about the

external world could be systematically deceived by a malevolent and omnipotent deceiver. By

positing such a scenario, Descartes challenges the reliability of sense experience and calls into

question the very foundations of our knowledge about the external world. In summary,

Descartes concludes that sense experience alone cannot provide a firm foundation for

knowledge.

After concluded sense experience is not sufficient to establish a foundation for knowledge

and having introduced the evil genius which has the power to deceive Descartes about various

aspects of reality and the reliability of his senses, he continues his scrutiny, advocating for a

more reliable method of inquiry grounded in reason and mind instead of external world and

senses. Descartes believes that through introspection and rational reflection, we can uncover
indubitable truths that transcend the limitations of sensory experience. Therefore, to Descartes

there is one fundamental aspect that the evil genius cannot undermine: the existence of

Descartes' own thinking self, or "I." Descartes famously asserts, "Cogito, ergo sum" ("I think,

therefore I am"), as the foundation of his philosophical inquiry. The very act of doubting

presupposes the existence of a thinking subject, the self. Descartes argues that even if the evil

genius were to deceive him about the external world, or about the reliability of his senses, the

existence of the thinking self cannot be doubted without affirming its existence. Doubt itself,

Descartes contends, confirms the existence of the doubting subject. Therefore, while the evil

genius may be able to deceive Descartes about many things, it cannot persuade him into

thinking that he does not exist. The existence of the thinking self, grounded in the act of doubt

itself, remains indubitable and immune to the deceptions of the evil genius. This recognition

forms a foundational pillar in Descartes' epistemological framework, providing a secure

foundation amidst the uncertainties of skepticism.

Having distinguished between the unreliable knowledge regarding the external world and

the undeniable fact of one's existence, Descartes keeps claiming that anything related to the

external world is uncertain, asserting that the thinking self, often referred to as "I," cannot be

conflated with the physical body due to their fundamentally different natures. Firstly,

Descartes posits that the mind, as a thinking and conscious entity, possesses properties such as

self-awareness, rationality, and the ability to doubt and reason. These attributes are essential to

the nature of the mind and are not characteristic of material objects, such as the body. The

mind, according to Descartes, is immaterial and indivisible, existing independently of the

physical world. In contrast, the body is characterized by extension, divisibility, and spatial

location. It is subject to physical laws and external influences, such as sensations and

perceptions. Descartes argues that the body is essentially mechanical in nature, operating

according to the laws of physics, whereas the mind transcends physical laws and possesses a
distinct mode of existence. Moreover, Descartes highlights the possibility of the mind existing

without the body, as demonstrated in his famous thought experiment of the disembodied

mind. He imagines the scenario of a mind existing independently of any physical body,

thereby emphasizing the separability of the mind from the material world. Overall, Descartes

rejects the identification of the thinking self with the body, arguing for the distinction between

mind and matter because uncertain knowledge received from external world and the

undeniable nature of the mind.

Also, one of the reasons that Descartes distinguishes between mind and body, and claim

that there is one indubitable truth that remains: the fact that he is a thinking being who doubts,

questions, and reasons considers first-person psychological states to be basic beliefs because

they are incorrigible and self evident. Unlike beliefs about the external world, which may be

subject to doubt and deception, first-person psychological states are immediately and

intuitively known to the individual experiencing them. For example, when one feels pain,

perceives the color red, or thinks about a mathematical concept, there is a direct and

undeniable awareness of these mental states.

Furhermore, in order to establish a solid foundation to knowledge and to refute the

possibility of systematic deception by an evil genius, Descartes provides an argument for the

existence of benevolent God. Descartes contends that the existence of God serves as the

guarantor of truth, ensuring the intelligibility of the external world because a good God does

not let people be deceived. By establishing the existence of such a deity, Descartes aims to

fortify the reliability of human knowledge and perception. If a benevolent God exists, it

follows that our perceptions and faculties of reasoning are trustworthy and aligned with truth.

After considered Descartes’ attempt to establish a solid ground for knowledge, one may

object to this argument like John Locke. Locke criticized Descartes' skepticism and

emphasized the significance of sensory experience in acquiring knowledge. As an empiricist

philosopher, Locke believed that all knowledge originates from sensory perception and that

our understanding of the external world is built upon our experiences. Locke argued against

Descartes' method of doubting all sensory information. He maintained that our senses provide

us with direct and immediate access to the external world, and it is through our perceptions

that we gain knowledge of the qualities and properties of objects. According to Locke, our

ideas are derived from the information received through our senses, and our understanding of

the external world is based on the correspondence between our ideas and the qualities of

objects in the external world. Locke's criticism of Descartes' skepticism can be seen in his

rejection of innate ideas. Unlike Descartes, who posited the existence of innate ideas, Locke

argued that the mind at birth is a "tabula rasa," a blank slate devoid of any innate knowledge.

He contended that all our ideas are derived from sensory experience and that the mind

actively processes and organizes these experiences to form knowledge. Nevertheless,

Descartes would likely reaffirm his commitment to rationalism and the role of reason in

acquiring knowledge. He might argue that while sensory experience is important, it is

ultimately the faculty of reason that allows us to make sense of our experiences and establish

certain knowledge. Descartes might contend that reason is capable of discerning innate ideas

and principles, which provide a foundation for knowledge that goes beyond mere sensory

perception.

Also Hume's critique of Descartes' reliance on reason as a source of certain knowledge is

grounded in his empiricist philosophy, which emphasizes the role of sensory experience in

shaping human understanding. Unlike Descartes, who prioritized reason and rationality in his

philosophical method, Hume argued that human reason is limited and fallible. One aspect of

Hume's critique lies in his skepticism regarding the concept of causality, which is crucial for

Descartes' epistemological project. Descartes sought to establish foundational truths through

deductive reasoning, aiming to attain indubitable knowledge upon which to build further
understanding. However, Hume questioned the validity of causal inference, arguing that our

perceptions of cause and effect are based on observed regularities rather than necessary

connections. He famously argued that we can never empirically observe causality itself but

only the constant conjunction of events. Therefore, Hume concluded that our knowledge of

causal relationships is not grounded in reason but rather in custom and habit.However,

Descartes placed great emphasis on reason and deduced knowledge as a source of certainty.

He might have argued that while reason has limitations, it still plays a crucial role in

establishing certain knowledge. Descartes might have asserted that through clear and distinct

perceptions, he could establish indubitable truths, including the existence of a thinking thing

(cogito) and the existence of God as a perfect being.

To conclude, Descartes aimed to establish a foundation for certain knowledge, which he

believed was not achievable within a framework based solely on externally received

information. By conducting thought experiments and providing examples of sensory illusions,

he sought to demonstrate the unreliability of knowledge acquired through the senses.

Descartes argued that the only knowledge that can be considered certain is the knowledge

concerning the self and its existence. He asserted that one's own existence as a thinking being,

as expressed in the famous phrase "Cogito, ergo sum" ("I think, therefore I am"), is an

indubitable truth. To further strengthen his foundation of knowledge, Descartes put forth the

argument for the existence of a benevolent God, relying on the ontologic argument.

Bibliography:

David Hume, An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding

Descartes, Meditations on First Philosophy
Michael Moval, A Critique of External World Skepticism
John Locke, An Essay Concerning Human Understanding
Ram Neta, External World Skepticism