Med 2 Essay

Question 1

Introduction:

Answer 1

+ in a position of diabolical doubt at beginning
+ tried to find absolute knowledge that survives demon
+ still close to defeat at the hands of the sceptics

Question 2

Introduction quote:

Answer 2

“So what remains true? Perhaps just the one fact that nothing is certain.”

Question 3

Paragraph 1 topic

Answer 3

The cogito

Question 4

Paragraph 1 points:

Answer 4

+ motivated by diabolical doubt, questioned the most basic element of humanity: their existence
+ dead end as he previously said that the earth, body’s and mind didn’t exist
+ realised that there must be something that exists to be deceived
+ states cogito: I am, I exist
+ first absolute truth
+ turning point: can use this as a foundation for new knowledge
+ necessary truth (self-authenticating, self-explanatory, rationalist and survived med 1 arguments)

Question 5

Paragraph 1 quote:

Answer 5

“But there is a deceiver of supreme power and cunning who is deliberately and constantly deceiving me. In that case, I too undoubtedly exist, if he is deceiving me”

Question 6

Paragraph 2 topic

Answer 6

The discussion of the cogito

Question 7

Paragraph 2 points:

Answer 7

• uses accepted definition of words
  + irrelevant, theory that matterS
  + Impossible task not to use language
• Hume: cannot know true self, as what we perceive is everyone else’s perception, therefore, can’t know what self is thinking
• Ayer: thoughts don’t require a thinker, meaning des rates might not be thinking and can’t conclude anything

Question 8

Your stance on paragraph 2?

Answer 8

Agree with both philosophers criticisms, to an extent

• they show how his wording and logic may be flawed
• however, seems odd to say one does not exist

Question 9

Paragraph 3 topic

Answer 9

Discourse version of the cogito

Question 10

Paragraph 3 points:

Answer 10

+ earlier version of cogito in “discourse on the method”
+ same in many ways to later cogito
+ uses incorrect standard form, argumentative style
+ relies on logic, which may be a prieur of deception
+ relies on hidden premise
+ Descartes does not solve these flaws in the later cogito, still open to deception, reducing the reliability of his entire quest

Question 11

Paragraph 3 quote and example:

Answer 11

“I think; therefore, I am”

P1- I think. P2 - Thinking things exist. C - therefore, I exist

Question 12

Paragraph 4 topic

Answer 12

The wax example

Question 13

Paragraph 4 points:

Answer 13

+ cogito is confusing and may be misinterpreted
+ Descartes introduced wax example to establish sovereignty of rationalism
+ melts wax: observes its smell, structure, taste and feel before and after
+ senses would say initial and final products are not related

Question 14

Paragraph 4 quote:

Answer 14

“Evidently it was not any of the features that the senses told me of; for all of them - brought to me through taste, smell, sight, touch or heading - have now altered, yet it is still the same wax”

Question 15

Paragraph 5 topic

Answer 15

Discussion of the wax example

Question 16

Paragraph 5 points:

Answer 16

+ empiricism would lead to wrong conclusion - proving he is a thinking thing, as he can deduce their relation
+ proves cogito, in his eyes
+ however, must have experienced melting process before to understand
+ accidental empiricism
+ furthermore, defies self-explanatory nature of cogito

Question 17

Your stance on paragraph 5?

Answer 17

I agree with criticisms of the example and find that it reduces the reliability of the cogito. Descartes may have used empiricism previously and has defied many of the values of the cogito

Question 18

Conclusion:

Answer 18

+ cogito is unsuccessful in providing absolute knowledge
+ uses pre-existing beliefs
+ denial of empiricism may be unwarranted
+ I,portant to note that if find theory valid, but that way Descartes presents it is not
+ therefore, still in diabolical doubt
+ close to defeat at the hands of the sceptics