meditation 3

i've been pretty sceptical about the whole god argument, but in paragraph 41 he says nothing can not come into being out of nothing, and something perfect can not come from someting less perfect. i'm not sure if he's saying there is a god but he is deffinatly implying that there is something out there responsible for creating everything we see. Also it might be a little off topic but he compares reality to perfection. the more reality something contains the more perfect it is.

meditation 3

there's a lot going on in this meditation but i think the main point is weather or not god exists. at one point he makes a real interesting point. he says you can't see heat but you can feel it. he goes on to talk about different things you no are true and can't see. i guess he's trying to say just cause you can't see god does not mean you can't prove he is there.

jimmy

meditation 3: Theory of Ideas

According to the meditator, there are three sources for ideas. Ideas can be innate, adventitious, or invented by us. Innate are ideas that are born in us. Adventitious ideas are those coming form the outside of us like our sensory perceptions. Ideas invented by us are like ideas of mermaids and unicorns. However, he is not sure of where the ideas come from and which come from where. However, he concerns himself with adventitious ideas and why he thinks they come from the outside. His will does not have any effect on adventitious ideas. For example, he says that when it is hot he cannot prevent himself from being hot through his will. He concludes by assuming that whatever outside source transmits adventitious ideas transmits its own likeness rather than something else.
-- Chris Rehonic

Meditation 3: Clear and Distinct perceptions

The meditator in this begins to review what he already had learned. He is doubtful of the existence of bodily things but is certain that he exists and that he is a thinking thingthat doubts, understands, wills, imagines, and senses. He clearly and distinctly percieves that he is a thinking thing. He could not be certain of this fact unless all clear and distinct perceptions are certain. Therfore, he continues on by saying that whatever is percieved distinctly and clearly is true. He admits that he percieves ideas of material object, but concludes he was wrong to infer from these ideas that his perception could inform him of the things themselves. He then says that he is certain of arimetic and geometry although he cannot be absolutely certain since God may be decieving him and looks into the nature of God.
--Chris Rehonic

Meditation 3

throughout meditation 3, Descartes asks himself whether or not his thoughts can determine whether or no there is such a thing as God. In my opinion to cover his tracks on this touchy subject he states that he has trouble believing if there is such a thing as God, there is no way he could be a deciever in his eyes. But as the book progresses he even questions his own statements like in other parts of the book and wonders if there is God, maybe he could be a deciever.

Meditation 3

it seems like there's a lot more going on then it shows on the surface of this meditation. it seems like he is making a lot of different analogies this way and that way almost to distract you from what is going on. i said something about this in the class discussion and i'll restate it here, i almost think he might not be fully convinced himself and he is just saying this for fear of persecution. maybe i'm just being scepticle, i don't know...

Discourse on Method, part 4, paragraph 2

Descartes continues you to discuss the existence of God through the perfect and imperfect mind. He believes the imperfect mind creates the delusions of imperfect objects such as the earth, the sky, etc... but the perfect mind holds thoughts of God which are not delusions. He concludes that God is a perfect mind and all perfections embodied by Descartes and others are a result of God's perfection. Another proof to God is seen through the use of a geometric proof that is all too familiar. This proof is one referring to triangles having three angles and the angles must add up to equal 180 degrees. God's existence is as certain as this proof. When contemplating God, existence is as much essential to being a property of God as having three angles in a triangle adding to be 180 degrees is a property of triangles. People have difficulty with these proofs according to Descartes since they exclusively rely on them using their senses and imagination. Unlike the geometric proofs, God's existence is percieved only by reason and not by the senses and imagination.
-- Chris Rehonic

Discourse on Method, Part 4

Descartes here is laying his foundation down to build upon. He states in prior readings that you should act decisively even when uncertain but then here says the complete opposite when he states that anything you can doubt is false. As a result, he only hold onto things that are certainly true without any doubt. Descartes abandons sensory knowledge and demonstrative knowledge. He feels that sensory knowledge means nothing since our senses can decieve us. Demonstrative knowledge has its flaws since people make errors when reasoning. Descartes believes that all the information entered in his mind areno more than the illusions brought on by his dreams. This ability to doubt is what is essential to his foundation. "I think, therefore I am" is his principle in part 4. He believes that since he can dount all these things then in this doubt he is thinking and that must mean he exists. Therefore, he is a thinking substance. Truth to this foundation is found through his distinct and clear perceptions.
-- Chris Rehonic

God vs. perfection

Descartes discusses how he finds out nothing in the world in ultimate perfection. The only perfect thing in existence is God himself and anything else has a flaw or imperfection of some kind. He also goes on to describe how the examples with flaws are made by God because no matter how close to perfection it can be, nothing can be absolutely perfect or else that would mean him, or anyone else would be God.

dicourse #4 paragraph 1

I think the first big main point he is getting at is the search for truth. I find it really interesting that to find truth Descartes feels or says you need to first doubt everything, and reject everything that he could imagine any doubt. I'm not sure but i think he saying for it to be true it has to have no doubt. I think he's getting at you have to doubt everything you can imagine and everything you were ever taught, because who's to say it was true. The biggest point in this first paragraph is that the only thing he can not doubt is himself because he must be true and he must exist if he can think....

jimmy