Week 1: René Descartes, "Meditations 1-2"

  1. Here is a reconstruction of Descartes' response to the concern that he might be dreaming (pages 14-15).

    1 (Premise): A dreamed image is a representation ("resemblance").
    2 (Premise): If a dreamed image is a representation, then the dream is not an "altogether new" image.
    3 (Premise): If a dream is not an "altogether new" image, then it represents "real and existing" parts.
    4 (Conclusion): Therefore, a dream represents "real and existing" parts.

    (a) Discuss what Descartes might mean in each of these sentences; refer to the original text as needed.
    (b) Is this a good argument? i.e. is it valid and sound?
    (c) To what extent does this argument overcome the concern that you might be dreaming?
    (d) Is the argument a good reason to conclude, as Descartes does, that arithmetic and geometry cannot be doubted?
  2. Descartes presents two arguments that he exists (pages 18-19):

    First Argument
    1 (Premise): I am convinced (namely, to doubt everything).
    2 (Premise): If I am convinced, then I exist.
    3. (Conclusion): Therefore, I exist.

    Second Argument
    1 (Premise): I think that I exist.
    2 (Premise): If I think that I exist, then I exist.
    3 (Conclusion): Therefore, I exist.

    (a) Compare these two arguments. How are they similar? How are they different?
    (b) What do the words 'convinced' and 'think' and 'exist' mean in this context?
    (c) Evaluate these arguments. Are they valid? Are they sound? Do they overcome the 'deceiving demon' concern?
  3. (Optional) After discussing the nature of a ball of wax that melts by the fire, Descartes concludes that "bodies themselves are perceived not, strictly speaking, by the senses or by the imaginative faculty, but by the intellect alone" (pg.24). How does his thinking about a ball of wax lead to this conclusion? Is Descartes right about this?