Intuition and deduction thesis Flashcards
explain the point of descartes and intuition and deduction thesis.
hold that knowledge can be acquired through a combination of intuition and deduction.
what is intuition
is a direct, non-inferential apprehension of truth, which occurs when we grasp something immediately without the need for further reasoning. According to descartes, intuition is the foundation of knowledge- and provides us with self evident truths that cannot be doubted.
what is deduction
Deriving conclusions from premises using logical reasoning. he argued that self evident truths through intuition, we can then use deduction to derive further from these truths.
what are descartes 4 rules for gaining knowledge
-accept beliefs that can be recognised as clear and distinct ideas
-break down problems into their smallest part
-build up the arguments systematically in the right order (deduction)
-carefully check to ensure no steps are left
define clear and distinct ideas
clear ideas are very bright in the mind, distinct ideas are very sharply separated from any other concepts in the mind.- example of leg pain, it may be very clear to one, however it isnt distinct.
critiques of descartes clear and distinct ideas- leibniz, ideas are not clear and distinct enough
the terms are not clear and distinct enough. A more detailed explanation is required to define clear and distinct ideas if these terms are going to be used as a criteria for truth.
critiques of descartes clear and distinct ideas-Quick generalisation
the success of the cogito relies on the idea that truths can be grasped clearly and distinctly. he generalisis the principle that any belief he can arrive at clearly and distinctly must be true.
critiques of descartes clear and distinct ideas-Ryle- correspondence theory of truth
descartes approach is mistaken because he claims a belief is true using internal means alone, other than verifying if the belief corresponds to an actual fact external of oneself, which corresponds with the world.
how does the cogito play a role in descartes intuition and deduction thesis
the cogito is one of the foundational truths which descartes arrives at through his intuition and deduction. the cogito the foundation for his thesis, using the cogito as a starting point for deducing further truths, such as the existence of god and nature itslef.
explain how the cogito can be explained as a deductive argument- Ps and Cs
P1. i am thinking
P2. all thinking things exist
c. Therefore i exist
Descartes denies that the cogito is a deduction, but instead it is an intuition of his mind. he requires this as he is still under the impression that a demon may be deceiving him, therefore it must be based of intuition alone.
how is the cogito a transcendental argument
transcendental arguments attempt to transcend doubt, in this case, descartes presents existence as a precondition for doubt to exist, as one needs to exist in order to doubt.
how is the cogito a self verifying thought
descartes often emphasises the fleeting nature of the cogito, i am, i exist, must be true whenever i think it. it follows that the truth of the cogito is revealed in the act of performing it. the thought ‘ i do not exist’ is self defeating in its performance, as one has to exist to perform it.
does the cogito produce knowledge
the argument seems circular as it assumes the existence of the self in order to establish the existence of the self.
some philosophers argue that the ‘i’ refers to a substantial self, a metaphysical entity that persists over time and is the subject of experience . where others argue that the ‘i’ is merely a collection of experiences and has no other substantial existence.
In conclusion, it is not clear that the cogito has proved any knowledge in the regard of the nature of existence, or even the existence of the ‘I’ that is thinking
is the cogito really a priori knowledge produced by intuition?
some philosophers argue that descartes learns the cogito by experiencing his own case that it isn’t possible to think without existing.
Arguments for the existence of God- A priori deductions
TRADEMARK ARGUMENT
in order to escape his doubts, descartes produces several arguments for the existence of god.
P1. The cause of an idea must be as perfect as the effect
p2. my ideas must be caused by something
p3. i am an imperfect being
p4. i have the idea of god, which is a perfect being
IC1. i cannot be the cause of my idea of god
IC2. only a perfect being (God) can be the cause of my idea of God
C. therefore God exists
Empiricist responses to the trademark argument- THE CAUSAL PRINCIPLE
Descartes has applied a physical law (that the cause must be as perfect as the effect) to the world of ideas. our minds can easily create better versions of our ideas. Hume argued that our idea of god is derived from seeing virtues in others and augmenting them without limit.
explain the empiricist theory that the trademark argument is not apriori
Hume argued we can never deduce the effect from examining the cause. In order to do this we need to experience the causal relationship before we can learn their connection. so from knowing the effect, we cannot deduce that god caused it.
how can descartes reply to the empiricist theory that the trademark argument is not
a-priori posed by hume
descartes can argue that the trademark argument is not based on an inference from a cause and effect, but instead the inherent nature of God. our clear and distinct idea of god is a necessary and innate idea which is not based on any empirical evidence. therefore hume’s argument cannot be used to challenge the validity of descartes trademark argument.
Arguments for the existence of God- A priori deductions- contingency argument
descartes argues that his own existence is enough to prove that there is a God.
P1. the cause of my existence must be either, me,i have always existed, my parents, or a perfect being
P2. it cannot be me, or i would have made myself perfect
P3, neither could i have existed forever or i would have remembered
P4. my parents may be the physical cause of my existence however they do not sustain me at all times
C. by elimination, therefore, only God can be the cause of my existence.
critic of the Contingency argument
It is argued that we could have been created by a less perfect being, perhaps evolution or an evil scientist. Descartes only presents us with a few options. these are not all exhaustive.
what is an empiricist response to Arguments for the existence of God- A priori deductions- contingency argument
This argument starts with a state of affairs with the world, which descartes attempts to deduce the cause, therefore they are abductive arguments. Hume argues that the reliance on the causal principle undermines this argument as deductive.
Arguments for the existence of God- A priori deductions- The ontological argument
P1. i have an idea of God as a perfect being
P2. A perfect being must have all perfections
P3. existence is a perfection
C. God exists.
Critique of the ontological argument- kant- existence is not a predicate
existence is not a quality of an object, it is not a predicate. if existence is not a predicate then this undermines p3 of Descartes ontological argument, and therefore C cannot follow.
how can descartes overcome the Critique of the ontological argument- kant- existence is not a predicate
reformulate the argument to make the connection that necessary existence is a predicate of god, and therefore god must exist by definition.
Empiricist response to descartes ontological argument- humes fork
hume argued that the claim of the existence of any object will always be a matter of fact. the claim will always need investigation to uncover its truth. you cannot prove the existence of an object through reason alone, which is what descartes tries to do.
Descartes proof of the external world ps and cs, step 1a,b and step 2
Descartes claims his sensations cannot come from inside him and must be cause by the external world. His arguments ar in two steps.
Step 1a:
P1. the will is part of my essence
P2. sensation is not subject to my will
C. sensations come from outside of me
Step 1b:
P1. my nature is unextended
P2. Sensations are ideas of extended things
C. sensations come from outside of me
Step 2.
P1. there are two possible sources for the origin of sensation, God or matter
P2. i have a strong inclination to believe sensations come from matter, and i have no faculty to correct my belief.
IC1. So if god were the origin of matter, then God would be a deceiver
P3. god is not a deceiver
C. therefore the origin of sensation is matter.
critique Descartes proof of the external world
critique of step 1a.perhaps sensations come from a part of me which is not conscious. After all dreams are not subject to my will however i still experience sensations. dreams do come from inside of me
critique of step 1b. it is not clear that an unextended thing could not produce the idea of an extended thing. Descartes is relying again on the causal principle, which does not readily apply to ideas.
Criticism of step 2.
is everyone inclined to believe everything comes from matter, perhaps god feeds the idea of material things into my mind (idealist point of view).
