I Read Some Descartes

 I dropped my only philosophy class in college because it was one of those huge lecture halls and the professor was not a good lecturer. He spent the lectures talking to the board and the first book in the syllabus was a book on string theory. I get what he was doing now but I wanted Plato.

 

So, I’ve been circling back around and trying to get a grounding in some of the foundations of western thought. For that I really like these thin Hackett books – accessible and not over-whelming.

 

Some interesting things that I came across here is that the two things that Descartes is most famous for, the Cogito Ergo Sum and the mind / body duality are literally in back-to-back paragraphs in the Discourse. He seems to be arguing to take everything from first principles, and it is an interesting path on one hand but on the other seems to deny all prior learning and feels a bit solipsistic. Only I can determine what is real and true. It’s whatever the opposite of standing on the shoulders of giants is.

 

The thing that strikes me is if he does that, it seems he doesn’t go far enough. There are multiple assumptions built into Cogito Ergo Sum, basically what the singular is, what thinking is, what being is, and what causation is. You really need to define all these before you stop at thinking. I could be missing something, or it could just be that the bar was way lower back then.

 

The other thing is that a huge part of the second book is trying to prove the existence of God, but it really feels to me like he basically makes an assumption about what God’s nature is like and then says it must be so. I wasn’t convinced.