Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Early Modern Philosophy > Quiz 1: Descartes > Flashcards

Quiz 1: Descartes Flashcards

1
Q

What is Descartes project?

A

sets out to find a firm foundation for knowledge

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

What is Descartes method?

A

hyperbolic doubt; treat every option that could be doubted as false (since it cannot serve a firm foundation for knowledge)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

What is Descartes application?

A

make use of his skeptical hypothesis to challenge the source/principle of knowledge (the senses)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

What is Descartes Hypothesis?

A 
four stages of doubt:
1) reliability of the senses
2) the dreaming scenario
3) the deceiver God
4) the evil genius
lead him to hypothesize/challenge that we can gain knowledge from the senses
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

What are Descartes 4 stages of doubt in meditation 1?

A

1) reliability of the senses
2) the dreaming scenario
3) the deceiver God
4) the evil genius

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

1) reliability of the senses

A

From time to time, Descartes senses deceive/mislead him (example: something far appearing smaller than it is)
Even if we are only ever deceived once we are never to trust our senses because we cannot deny that they are not constantly deceiving us
Therefore, the senses are an unreliable principle of knowledge for they have decided us before and could do so again at any time

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

2) the dreaming scenario

A

“Suppose that I am dreaming…”
Dreams are another way ur perception fools us
We are often asleep at night and convinced our dreams are reality. There are never any sure signs that distinguish being awake from being asleep.
Therefore we cannot know that what we are perceiving is not a dream
At any time, we could be mistaking a dream for reality
Challenge: Universal Truths that exist whether we are awake or asleep (ex: 2 + 2 = 4)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

3) the deceiver God

A

We believe in a God who is able to do anything and by whom we (an universal truths) have all been created
BUT…how do we know this God did not bring it about that no Earth, shape, size, etc.
Supposing this, overtime we add 2 + 2 we would be being deceived (alongside all other universal truths)
If it is possible for the omnipotent God which we believe to exist, it is possible for Him to be a deceiver in which case all that we perceive and think we know would be a false illusion enforced by a deceiver God

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

4) the evil genius

A

Descartes considers the God we characterize (omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient, benevolent) except instead of benevolent, is malicious
A supremely powerful, clever, evil genius who has directed entire effort at deceiving humans

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

What is the principle of knowledge in which Descartes challenges?

A

the senses

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Why does Descartes settle on a skeptical hypothesis?

A

He cannot be certain that what he perceives through his senses is reality for they have deceived him before (e.g. in dreams). At anytime, what perceives to be reality through his senses could be a deception. He cannot know for certain that the world exists.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

How does Descartes aim to prove God’s existence in his third meditation

A

Two a posteriori proofs

1) First: Our idea of God - an idea of an infinite substance cannot come from a finite substance
2) Second: Conception - his existence must come from God

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

By his third meditation, Descartes is sure of one thing. What is he certain of and why?

A

Descartes is sure that he, as a thinking thing, exists (ergo sum; ergo exist - I am, I exist). In order to be deceived, he that which is being deceived must also exist. At the very least, he exists as an object of deception.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

What is the essential conclusion of Descartes first a posteriori proof for God’s existence?

A

If Descartes has the idea God exists, God must exist

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Outline Descartes 1st a posteriori proof for God’s existence… (4)

A

1) I have an idea of God (as supremely perfect, etc.)
2) There must be at least as much )formal) reality in the cause of my idea as there is (objective reality in the idea itself
3) The only possible cause of my idea of God is God himself (i.e. nothing else has sufficient formal reality to account for the objective reality of the idea)
* Hybrid Casual Principle: only God can cause my idea God, Descartes has a clear and distinct notion of God*
4) Therefore, God must exist (as the cause of my idea)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

What does the Hybrid Casual Principle (hardwired) essentially state? What further evidence (3) does it lead him to discover?

A

Descartes is stating that if the idea of a perfect being exists in his head, then it must actually exist because it is greater than him and he cannot compose an idea greater than him nor put it in his head.
To achieve this statement, he considers his ideas and their possible sources…
Among his idea (in addition to the one that displays him as a thinking thing) are others that
1) Represent God
2) Represent Corporeal/Inanimate things
3) Represent Angels, Animals and other Humans

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

How does Descartes categorize our ideas?

A

1) Represent God
2) Represent Corporeal/Inanimate things
3) Represent Angels, Animals and other Humans

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

Descartes contemplates the possible origins of our ideas of:

A

1) God
2) Corporeal Things
3) Angels, Animals, Humans

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

How does Descartes contemplate the possible origins of his ideas of angels, animals and humans?

A

Descartes argues that he alone could be the cause of their ideas
He has no basis to assume their existences anything other than the cause of their ideas
They could be put together from ideas of himself, God and corporeal things

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

How does Descartes contemplate the possible origins of his ideas of corporeal things?

A

He believes he can cause their ideas but discovers this conclusion differently (since he contains enough reality formally and actually that he can account for the reality for these things)…
The things he clearly and distinctly perceives can be narrowed down to EXTENSION
Descartes considers that he is an independent substance which can cause ideas of 1) other substances and 2) modes
Modes cannot cause ideas of substances b/c inferior;
We can distinguish ideas in terms of whether they represent ideas or modes (by whether they are dependent or independent)
What is more real cannot cause what is less real to come to be
(Descartes is suggesting we can divide corporeal things into different degrees of reality: more and less real things)
For example, I can cause knowledge into other minds but knowledge cannot cause me
DESCARTES IS A SUBSTANCE, CORPORAL THINGS ARE MODES, THEREFORE HE CAN CAUSE IDEAS OF CORPORAL THINGS

21
Q

How does Descartes contemplate the possible origins of his ideas of God?

A

Descartes could not have arisen from himself, so God necessarily exists, BUT he asks…
How much objective reality is there in my idea of God?
W typically think of substances as independent, since they don’t rely on other things for their existence while modes are dependent on substances to exist
Now we must determine how to distinguish substance from substance
Ontological Dependence: humans are dependent on parents, food, water; all of which are dependent on other things for their existence…even infinite things
God is the only substance ultimately independent (not dependent on anything for His existence) therefore God is an infinite substance
In short, God is an infinite (the only infinite) substance. Therefore, Descartes idea of God must contain an infinite amount of objective reality. He cannot cause an idea such as this. Only God can. So God must exist.

22
Q

What does Descartes mean by the word God?

A

infinite, independent, supremely intelligent, supremely powerful, creator of everything else that (if anything else) exists

23
Q

What is ontological dependence?

A

Substances dependent on other substances for existence (i.e. human on food, food on trees it comes from, trees on photosynthesis, photosynthesis on Sun; Sun on hydrogen and helium)
We are all ontologically dependent on God, God is the only substance that is ontologically independent
Even infinite substances such as timed space: time is infinite but God brought it to be, space is endless but God brought it to be therefore space and time are finite substances

24
Q

Why must God exist according to Descartes a posteriori proof?

A

God is an infinite (the only infinite) substance. Therefore, Descartes idea of God must contain an infinite amount of objective reality. He cannot cause an idea such as this. Only God can. So God must exist.

25
Q

Summarize Descartes entire first a posteriori proof for God’s existence

A

Overall, in his first a posteriori proof for the existence of God, Descartes proves existence through determining
1) what can cause ideas
2) what can cause our ideas of substances/modes
The debate of things that are really real (substances and modes) cause ideas
Whatever is higher can cause what is lower cannot cause what is higher
God is the highest and Descartes therefore could not have cause God

Nothing can come from nothing

26
Q

What are 3 objections Descartes considers and his responses?

A

1) Idea of Substance
It has been shown that I already have the idea of substance, thus the idea of God can be drawn from me
Descartes Reply: I am a finite substance with the idea of an infinite substance

2) Negation of Own Perfection
Perhaps my idea of God is achieved by simply taking the negation of my own imperfection (I can get an idea of God by reflection of my own imperfections and imagining an idea that doesn’t have them)
Descartes Reply: I must have the idea of supreme perfection (God) by acknowledging that I have deficiencies.

3) God’s Perfection is our Potential
Perhaps the perfections I attribute to God are in me potentially
Descartes Reply: Maybe I contain infinity in a potential way, but this is not the same kind of infinity as God’s.
Our potential: limitless (we can strive)
God: true infinity (cannot be more perfect)

27
Q

What are 3 objections to Descartes first a posteriori proof?

A

1) Idea of Substance
2) Negation of Own Perfection
3) God’s Perfection is our Potential

28
Q

How does Descartes account for human error in his fourth meditation?

A

1) Ontological Account: our inferiority to God accounts for our errors
2) Psychological Account: error consists in a misuse of our unguided freedom

29
Q

Why does Descartes account for human error in meditation four?

A

Descartes feels he has provided sufficient evidence to prove God is not a deceiver (nor an evil genius) by proving He is benevolent. However, a theological problem remains: If God were all-good, He would have created Descartes perfect and yet he makes mistakes

30
Q

What is the theological problem that motivates Descartes 4th meditation?

A

If God were all-good, He would have created Descartes perfect and yet he makes mistakes. Therefore, God cannot be all-good and can possibly be a deceiver. Descartes must account for human error

31
Q

Ontological Account (for human error)

A

Our inferiority to God accounts for our errors
On the scale of being, he is less than God
He falls short of God (is not omniscient) therefore of course he makes mistakes
We have a name for the one being whois always good/right/never makes mistakes: God
He is not God, therefore is not always all-good/right and makes mistakes
HOWEVER: FLAW
our errors are not incapabilities, but limits

32
Q

Psychological Account (for human error)

A

Our errors are misjudgements of our free will
The intellect holds an account of knowledge and our free will chooses (by random) to accept or negate it
The free will is NOT guided by intellect because if that were true, we would not have free will (this goes against our common conception of FW)
AUGUSTINE’S THEODICY

Since our FW is not guided by the intellect, it makes mistakes
When the will limits itself to affirming or denying that which is presented to it by the intellect, it is indifferent
Thus, we all make wrong (and right) decisions all of which are merely accidental misjudgements

33
Q

What is the significance of Descartes accounts for human error for his entire project in the meditations?

A

Meditation 1: negates 2/4 of his four stages of doubt
Meditation 3: supports his conclusion that God is not a deceiver, but benevolent
Meditation 6: foundational for his argument from the senses in which he argues God is not a deceiver and thus our natural inclinations (that lead us to believe bodies exist) are reliable

34
Q

How does Augustine’s theodicy relate to Descartes psychological account for error?

A

Augustine aims to solve the problem of human error (evil, in his religious terms)
If humans were predetermined by God to be good then true moral goodness would not be possible
Goodness occurs when we are open to choosing good or evil and choose good

Only with free will is true moral goodness possible because we have the opportunity to choose right over wrong

35
Q

For which meditations are Descartes accounts for human error especially significant?

A

Meditation 1: negates 2/4 of his four stages of doubt
Meditation 3: supports his conclusion that God is not a deceiver, but benevolent
Meditation 6: foundational for his argument from the senses in which he argues God is not a deceiver and thus our natural inclinations (that lead us to believe bodies exist) are reliable

36
Q

By meditation 6, Descartes is sure that

A

1) he as a thinking thing exists

2) God exists

37
Q

What motivates Descartes 6th meditation?

A

Descartes is uncertain whether he has a body or if the external world exists (e.g. material objects)
In his 6th meditation, he concerns the existence of material things and aims to show they exist

38
Q

What 3 arguments does Descartes use to show material things exist?

A

1) Argument from the INTELLECT
2) Argument from the IMAGINATION
3) Argument from the SENSES

39
Q

Explain the Pineal Gland Theory

A

There is a soul in the pineal gland
(Descartes chooses this gland because there is only one and he is interested in the relation with entity and unison and its association with dualism)
When we perceive an object its particles interact with our pineal gland and the image of it occurs in our soul
EYES ARE PASSIVE IN THE OPERATION
Extromissionism & Intromissionism?

40
Q

Argument from the Intellect

A

God can bring about anything that is not impossible or contradictory
Nothing that is clearly and distinctly perceived by the intellect can be brought about or contradictory
Therefore anything that can be clearly and distinctly perceived by the intellect can be brought about by God
My ideas of material things are clearly and distinctly perceived (as extended, mutable, flexible, etc.)
Therefore, GOD CAN CREATE MATERIAL THINGS (that are extended, mutable, flexible, etc.)

Descartes suggests we already have the conclusion we want but he aims to provide evidence to support it in his next 2 arguments (from the imagination & senses)

41
Q

Argument from the Imagination

A

The imagination requires an external bodily source

Descartes aims to remove the relationship between the imagination and intellect (to create a second proof for existence of materialism)
His perception of imagination: faculty which deals with images as objects
Closely related to bodies and depends on body in a way that intellect doesn’t, therefore they are separate
Imagination requires a peculiar effort of mind which is not required for understanding
Hence, a clear distinction between the Imagination and Pure Understanding
Effort = contemplating a FIGURE that lies before us
Unlike intellect, imagination depends on something else; something bodily
PINEAL GLAND THEORY
Essentially, Descartes is stating that the existence of the imagination is dependent on an outside source for its ideas an images because something cannot come from nothing
Source is bodily extension
Allows us to perceive Material Objects and is in connection with our pineal gland (where the soul lies)

42
Q

Argument from the Senses

A

Senses are a passive faculty for information
BUT passive faculty cannot be used without the existence of a cause (source of information)
The source must be in him, or in something else (not in him because it doesn’t involve understanding or will, therefore it’s in bodies, God or something else)
God is not a deceiver, and Descartes has a natural inclination to believe ideas issue anything other that bodies because God has given us no means to determine this
THEREFORE, SENSIBLE IDEAS PROCEED FROM BODIES THEREFORE, BODIES EXIST

43
Q

Summarize the conclusion of the Argument from the Imagination

A

The imagination requires an external bodily source

44
Q

What principle follows from Descartes argument from the senses?

A

To expand on the natural inclination, Descartes believes we have a natural inclination to believe ideas issued from bodies and material objects (For example FIRE)
Our perception of fire as orangey-redflames combined with our belief/understanding that it is hot keeps us from getting burned.
Descartes seems to be claiming we do not need experimental knowledge because we have discursive knowledge that is dependable since
1) it appears that way
2) God is not a deceiver

45
Q

Summarize the conclusion of the Argument from the Senses

A

Sensible ideas precede from bodies therefore bodies exist

46
Q

Summarize the conclusion of the Argument from the Imagination

A

The imagination requires an external bodily source

Essentially, Descartes is stating that the existence of the imagination is dependent on an outside source for its ideas an images because something cannot come from nothing
Source is bodily extension which allows us to perceive Material Objects and is in connection with our pineal gland (where the soul lies)

47
Q

Summarize the conclusion of the Argument from the Intellect

A

God can bring about anything that is not impossible, nothing perceived by intellect is impossible, anything clearly/distinctly perceived can be brought about by God, my ideas of materials are clearly/distinctly perceived, God can create material things

48
Q

Summarize the conclusion of the Argument from the Senses

A

Sensible ideas precede from bodies therefore bodies exist

Senses = passive faculty for relaying information
BUT passive faculty cannot be used without existence of a cause (source) of information

49
Q

How does Descartes distinguish the intellect from the imagination

A

Closely related to bodies and depends on body in a way that intellect doesn’t, therefore they are separate

Early Modern Philosophy (1 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions