Introduction
In this paper, I examine René Descartes’s view on intellectual knowledge, as presented in the philosopher’s first principle and the four steps of the Cartesian method. Descartes’ principal argument is that knowledge should be based on truth. The scholar wonders why different versions of the so-called truth exist. According to him, the truth is stubborn and exists in only one version, meaning that there can never be two truths concerning a specific aspect.
Accordingly, Descartes blames prejudice, a fundamental aspect of sense, for the existence of multiple truths. The philosopher thus develops the four steps necessary to vet absolute certainty, leading to the development of metaphysical knowledge. Doubting everything, breaking every idea or problem into smaller bits, solving the simplest glitches first, and making complete enumerations and comprehensive reviews comprise the four phases of truth deduction, as per Descartes (Melchert and Morrow 362). Descartes reiterates that humans “withdraw the mind from the senses” (Melchert and Morrow 362) and focus on their distinctive concepts of the principles of things to acquire an unbiased reality. Consequently, the four steps significantly imply the elimination of sense-reliance from true knowledge-seeking.
Question: Is René Descartes’ view concerning knowledge development and truth-seeking valid?
Thesis: Descartes’ view is significantly valuable to comprehend, as it has the potential to assist humans in distinguishing between different classes of knowledge that vary in terms of certainty or confidence. Following Descartes’ method can help humans attain nearly all the aspects that constitute human knowledge.
Plan: This work aims to demonstrate the validity of Descartes’ four steps of knowledge development. The work aims to demonstrate that the philosopher’s method is real and effective, despite many people’s disregard for him as a mere mathematician struggling to apply mathematical principles in places where they do not fit. Accordingly, the discussion achieves this goal by elucidating the connection between doubt elimination, problem simplification, sense construction, and comprehensive steps and reviews for the realization of clear and distinct knowledge.
Descartes’ Four-Step Method as a Response to Uncertain Knowledge
Descartes’ four-step method offers a solution to the recurring problem of contradictory knowledge in earlier philosophical works. Many philosophers who existed before Descartes delivered information based on unprovable elements. For example, Aristotelians’ focus on God’s will and final cause led to subjective knowledge that confused people. This aspect concerns Descartes, prompting him to apply mathematical and physical principles to develop a method of knowledge acquisition that humans can use to verify the resultant truths. Descartes believes that his predecessors’ problem was not a lack of intellectual capacity but the absence of a “sound method” (362). Therefore, the philosopher applies the four steps to acquiring beyond-doubt information that humans can trust.
The first step is “never to accept anything as true if I did not have evident knowledge of its truth” (362). The phase requires knowledge seekers to eliminate preconceptions and refrain from drawing conclusions prematurely whenever presented with a problem. The step aims to help humans evaluate information thoroughly to eliminate doubt, with anything presenting uncertainty failing the test. Accordingly, applying this first step with the others helps Descartes realize valid and reliable concepts worth becoming real knowledge.
The Foundations of Modern Philosophy and the Quest for Absolute Truth
Descartes’s ability to shift focus from the fallacious narrative of wisdom-finding to developing verifiable knowledge makes his work unique and worthy of every consideration. Schumacher notes that the philosopher’s focus on the method comes from the incongruous point that “philosophy had been cultivated for years by the best minds that have ever lived and that nevertheless, no single thing is to be found in it which is not a subject to of dispute and… not dubious” (10). Accordingly, Descartes applied his knowledge of geometry and mathematics to undoubtedly gain insight, thus making philosophy what it should be.
Philosophy as a science seeks to discover and justify absolute knowledge. The point that there can never be two forms of the same truth highlights the open failure of almost all the earlier pieces of knowledge developed by thinkers like Aristotle and Plato. Investigating the works of earlier philosophers makes one doubt certain aspects as mere insights based on subjective experience. Descartes’s intention while establishing the four-step method was to end such a dubious mentality. The matter justifies the title’ father of modern philosophy’ associated with Descartes, making his insight indispensable.
Critiques of Judgment and Doubt in Descartes’ Method
Basing actual knowledge on people’s judgment significantly allows people to question Descartes’ four-step method. Particularly, the first step directs people to “never accept anything as true that can be doubted” (Melchert and Morrow 362). The directives require that even the slightest doubt lead to the renunciation of an idea among many individuals. Accordingly, the step makes everyone a judge, not delineating the elements one must possess to decide on a philosophy.
The matter further dissolves Descartes’ argument against sense, which many individuals apply to determine doubtfulness. For example, understanding a mathematical theorem allows one to openly accept it, while anyone without prior knowledge may develop doubts, forcing the latter party to filter the idea. That way, Descartes’ philosophy lacks the independence it claims to have, making it another shallow argument.
While those critiquing Descartes’ focus on judgment-making as a fundamental aspect of determining true knowledge have some merit, the group significantly overlooks the philosopher’s four steps’ completeness. Indeed, applying the four steps makes the sound distinctly concerning, but Descartes never intended to have them operate this way. As a mathematician, the scholar wishes that individuals utilize the complete steps sequentially and without haste to eliminate prejudice. Accordingly, a doubtful idea does not certainly die at the first step. Rather, the thinker applies analytical concepts to decipher actual aspects. Therefore, only misunderstanding the four-step method causes this kind of concern, while being thorough, as Descartes wills, provides the factual concept worth developing into unbiased knowledge.
Clarifying Misinterpretations of the Four-Step Method
Descartes’ provision of distinctiveness and clarity as the ultimate mark of truth makes his knowledge-seeking endeavor appear subjective. He says, “I now seem to be able to lay it down as a general rule that whatever I perceive very clearly and distinctly is true” (Hamilton 347). The argument raises the question of what conceivable proficiency can license people to determine that their understanding is clear and distinct enough to be factual and to make it impossible that they are mistaken.
The two elements overlook the open tendency at which humans become deceived, even when one thinks they know something clearly, leading to the question of how one can recognize distinct and clear perceptions. Descartes’ adoption of mathematical concepts with specific formulas makes him oblivious to the senses’ role in knowledge creation. The philosopher appraises rationalism while discrediting empiricism, putting him in direct divergence from other philosophers, such as Locke (Kenny 129). Therefore, insisting on the primary measurable qualities leads Descartes to generate a specific form of knowledge significantly different from the practical and submicroscopic forms.
Clear and Distinct Perception as the Mark of Truth
The argument about Descartes’ mark of truth is sound, though it overlooks the philosopher’s definition of the two terms. Critics frequently wonder whether specific skills, knowledge, or methods exist to allow individuals to think clearly and distinctively. The reviewers thus mistakenly link the simple belief that one has accomplished lucidity and vividness as the primary measure of truth, as per Descartes. Accordingly, the philosopher does not provide the answer to such queries openly, instead agreeing with the challengers that people can have wrong beliefs.
Nonetheless, Descartes maintains that humans “have a clear and distinct perception of something if, when we consider it, we cannot doubt it” (Descartes and Tweyman 145). The argument implies that in the face of honest, transparent, and discrete insight, people’s affirmation of actual knowledge is so strong that it cannot be dazed, even by an intensive exertion to call the elements thus acknowledged into uncertainty. Consequently, the philosopher’s response includes ‘will’ in the facet of truth determination, which works with the intellect to deliver reliable results.
Conclusion
Descartes is undoubtedly the father of modern philosophy, based on his ability to convert philosophy from a daily life thing into an academic concept. The four-step method of defining actual knowledge is among the philosopher’s famous works. Such steps include suspecting everything, analyzing difficulties by breaking them into reduced parts, solving the simplest concerns first, and being thorough. Descartes is the father of rationalism, which, together with empiricism, constitutes the two fundamental sources of knowledge. Accordingly, the philosopher’s work and concepts remain indispensable despite momentous criticism.
Works Cited
Descartes René and Stanley Tweyman. Meditations on First Philosophy. Caravan Books 2002.
Hamilton Chris. Understanding Philosophy for As Level: Aqa.Nelson Thornes 2003.
Kenny Anthony. The Oxford History of Western Philosophy. 1994.
Melchert Norman and Morrow David R. The Great Conversation: A Historical Introduction to Philosophy. 4th ed. McGraw-Hill Higher Education 2002.
Schumacher Ernst. F. A Guide for the Perplexed. Vintage Books 2011.