DESCARTES MEDITATIONS NOTES
1: Describe the strategy that Descartes says he intends to use.
Descartes was a foundationalist looking for an unshakeable foundation for knowledge (an
Archimedean firm spot), which cannot be doubted. He chose sceptical doubt as his method
arguing that if he could prove that there are absolutely indubitable truths even if the strongest
form of sceptical argument- hyperbolic doubt- is applied, then he could show that scepticism is
wrong.
The Method of Cartesian Doubt involves doubting ‘everything’, treating all his former beliefs
as if they were false. The slightest doubt about the truth of a belief is sufficient to reject it. The
fact that you can doubt something does not prove that it is false, but because there are some
grounds for scepticism it cannot serve as a foundation for knowledge. Descartes wanted to rid
himself of all his former beliefs in one go and then start over from scratch. He used the analogy
of ‘rotten apples in a barrel’ to explain his approach. Descartes advocated this method as a
once in a lifetime exercise.
2: Describe how Descartes implements this strategy in the rest of Meditation 1.
The Method of Cartesian Doubt involves doubting everything, treating all his former beliefs as if
they were false. Descartes focuses on basic beliefs- both a priori and a posteriori- because all
the other non-basic beliefs rely on these.
He briefly mentions his childhood at the beginning – things had been taught to him by his
teachers which then turned out to be false. The argument against authorities is only briefly
discussed in the Meditations though. He then turns to ‘sensation’ saying that his senses
sometimes fooled him in the past. For example: distant objects-perceptual errors/optical
illusions. A tower might appear to be round from a distance however, up close you can actually
see that it is square. These phenomena bother him but he argues that most sense experiences
1
, are reliable. He is sitting now by the fire writing. Only a madman would doubt that, he says. Or
maybe not.
Descartes admits that he had very vivid dreams in the past that seemed real. He even dreamed
about sitting by the fire writing. What if he’s dreaming? He does not say that he is, only that he
does not know that he isn’t. Since there is a small element of doubt there, he must reject all
sense experience/ all a posteriori knowledge. At this stage he’s still got a priori knowledge
though. Clearly, 2+3=5 is true whether he is awake or asleep.
But what if God deceives him? He rejects this idea. God is omni-benevolent and wouldn’t do
such a thing. But what if there was an Evil Demon fooling him about everything, leading him
astray?
P1: I believe that p. (I am awake/ 2+3=5)
P2: I might be dreaming/ being deceived by the Evil Demon.
P3: If I am asleep dreaming/ being deceived by the Evil Genius than p. is false.
C1: Therefore, p. might be false.
C2: Therefore, I don’t know P.
Basically, there are 3 main stages in Meditation 1:
• Doubting some sense experience
• All a posteriori knowledge must be doubted. (The Dream Argument)
• All a priori knowledge must be doubted as well. (The Evil Demon Argument)
At the end of Meditation 1, Descartes is basically left ‘in unrelenting darkness’ with the notion
that nothing can be known for certain.
3: Criticisms of the Method
Descartes only advocated his method as a once in a life-time exercise – it’s rather unpractical
and time-consuming.
2
1: Describe the strategy that Descartes says he intends to use.
Descartes was a foundationalist looking for an unshakeable foundation for knowledge (an
Archimedean firm spot), which cannot be doubted. He chose sceptical doubt as his method
arguing that if he could prove that there are absolutely indubitable truths even if the strongest
form of sceptical argument- hyperbolic doubt- is applied, then he could show that scepticism is
wrong.
The Method of Cartesian Doubt involves doubting ‘everything’, treating all his former beliefs
as if they were false. The slightest doubt about the truth of a belief is sufficient to reject it. The
fact that you can doubt something does not prove that it is false, but because there are some
grounds for scepticism it cannot serve as a foundation for knowledge. Descartes wanted to rid
himself of all his former beliefs in one go and then start over from scratch. He used the analogy
of ‘rotten apples in a barrel’ to explain his approach. Descartes advocated this method as a
once in a lifetime exercise.
2: Describe how Descartes implements this strategy in the rest of Meditation 1.
The Method of Cartesian Doubt involves doubting everything, treating all his former beliefs as if
they were false. Descartes focuses on basic beliefs- both a priori and a posteriori- because all
the other non-basic beliefs rely on these.
He briefly mentions his childhood at the beginning – things had been taught to him by his
teachers which then turned out to be false. The argument against authorities is only briefly
discussed in the Meditations though. He then turns to ‘sensation’ saying that his senses
sometimes fooled him in the past. For example: distant objects-perceptual errors/optical
illusions. A tower might appear to be round from a distance however, up close you can actually
see that it is square. These phenomena bother him but he argues that most sense experiences
1
, are reliable. He is sitting now by the fire writing. Only a madman would doubt that, he says. Or
maybe not.
Descartes admits that he had very vivid dreams in the past that seemed real. He even dreamed
about sitting by the fire writing. What if he’s dreaming? He does not say that he is, only that he
does not know that he isn’t. Since there is a small element of doubt there, he must reject all
sense experience/ all a posteriori knowledge. At this stage he’s still got a priori knowledge
though. Clearly, 2+3=5 is true whether he is awake or asleep.
But what if God deceives him? He rejects this idea. God is omni-benevolent and wouldn’t do
such a thing. But what if there was an Evil Demon fooling him about everything, leading him
astray?
P1: I believe that p. (I am awake/ 2+3=5)
P2: I might be dreaming/ being deceived by the Evil Demon.
P3: If I am asleep dreaming/ being deceived by the Evil Genius than p. is false.
C1: Therefore, p. might be false.
C2: Therefore, I don’t know P.
Basically, there are 3 main stages in Meditation 1:
• Doubting some sense experience
• All a posteriori knowledge must be doubted. (The Dream Argument)
• All a priori knowledge must be doubted as well. (The Evil Demon Argument)
At the end of Meditation 1, Descartes is basically left ‘in unrelenting darkness’ with the notion
that nothing can be known for certain.
3: Criticisms of the Method
Descartes only advocated his method as a once in a life-time exercise – it’s rather unpractical
and time-consuming.
2
