Rene Descartes was a famous philosopher from the era of Enlightenment who has made some relevant points today. Throughout his life, he has challenged the views he was taught and one’s perception of the world. This made the philosopher one of the most influential figures in skepticism and rationalism. The following essay will defend the former by depicting some of the issues and referencing Descartes’ works.
One of the most defining viewpoints that he had, which is still relevant today, is questioning what he was taught and his own perceptions. In one of the texts from the series of Meditations, the philosopher says the following: “Once in my life I had to raze everything to the ground and begin again from the original foundations if I wanted to establish anything firm and lasting in the sciences.” (Unit 8) What makes this idea modern is that even nowadays, society struggles with the dilemma of whether their beliefs are valid.
Nowadays, one of the most common beliefs that is interpreted by many as misleading is the belief in mechanical reductionism, that is, the idea that everything can be explained by mechanical processes that have already been researched and discovered (Module 13). Neuroscientist Raymond Tallis, in spite of not being a philosopher, debunks that assumption by providing three reasons to validate his point: intentionality, memory and innerness.
Raymond believes that humanity is conscious about everything surrounding them, which, in turn, is reminiscent of Descartes’ acknowledgment of “the thinking thing”. While the philosopher, unlike Tallis, has a more distrustful perception of how he and other people see the world, both acknowledge that thought processes are impossible without that part. One cannot have opinions and beliefs, including inaccurate ones, without having a perceptive self.
For many people, two of the philosopher’s beliefs, the idea of one’s world comprehension being invalid and past teachings being irrelevant, may seem weird and nihilistic. However, that understanding of Rene’s opinions is rather harsh, as it, in a way, blocks any opportunity for mental flexibility and overviewing one’s perception of everything around them. As a matter of fact, it provides the necessary dialogue for evaluating and analyzing modern and past beliefs. Moreover, it reminds humanity that their comprehension of the environment and reality is flawed.
In the present, people see themselves as superior and assume that their thoughts and opinions require no changes or reviews whatsoever. Descartes’ personal example of searching for different viewpoints is an excellent idea to challenge that viewpoint. Exposing oneself to other ideas can expand the comprehension of a certain belief and, in a way, demonstrate the flaws of one’s opinion prior to discovering the opposite or different one.
One may think that Rene’s distrust towards his predecessors is similar to that of modern people, but what is commonly overlooked is that his beliefs provided room for self-improvement and analysis of one’s personal beliefs and what one was taught prior to having a sense of self. Most present-day humanity, however, does not take the same steps and applies that distrust to fuel their sense of superiority, as opposed to Descartes’ goal of reviewing past teachings.
Fortunately, as mentioned earlier, the attempts to mechanize and simplify the world have triggered the rise of skepticism. It teaches humanity to challenge the old, the new and modern thoughts. This viewpoint helps one better understand how and why everyone’s perception is flawed. As opposed to the aforementioned distrustful attitude towards the thinkers of the past, it motivates people to seek alternative solutions and opinions.
It is important to mention, however, that while skepticism draws attention to the flaws of one’s and past people’s thoughts, it acknowledges the existence of a being capable of having an opinion and perception. As Descartes states in one of his Meditations texts: “But doubtless I did exist, if I persuaded myself of something”. Perception and comprehension cannot be flawed without the mere existence of a creation capable of those aspects.
This specific aspect invalidates the attempts to mechanize those processes. Ironically, people like Daniel Dennett, one of the supporters of mechanical reductionism, are living proof of how flawed perception can be. His attempt to define this concept with the help of calculated processes of the brain not only oversimplifies but, in a way, implies that everyone’s comprehension of the world is perfect or barely has any mistakes.
By challenging the flaws in one’s opinions, people may not only prove the imperfection of everybody’s thought processes, but it may also help trigger further research as well. Scientists like Dennett wrongfully believe that everything already has an explanation while simultaneously ignoring the logical gaps in their theories. By following Descartes’ and Tallis’ examples, humanity may be inspired to find answers to unexplored or explicitly overviewed questions and misconceptions.
One may say that by supporting skepticism, Rene and his supporters trapped themselves. Said trap is defined by contradictory viewpoints on the immaterial perceptive being and the world (Unit 9). But what is commonly ignored is that Descartes’s fellow skeptics are perfectly aware of their opinions being flawed. They do not imply that their views lack gaps or issues that are yet to be reviewed. On the contrary, they explicitly support that their understanding of the environment is imperfect.
While Rene’s belief that someone sinister may have planted a number of illusions may be rather paranoid to some extent, it is insightful to a degree as well. It reminds people that certain teachings may not be entirely accurate and that every belief, both one’s personal and somebody else’s, requires deep and thorough analysis. At times, Descartes’ fear of one’s thoughts not belonging to him can be quite valid in some situations. After all, people do not start their lives with a pre-existing set of their own thoughts and beliefs. Although it may be irrational to state that whoever implanted those thoughts must be a delinquent person, his fearful monologue triggers conversations regarding one’s actual viewpoints and implanted ones.
In conclusion, skepticism provides input on a set of interesting issues. The first one is the validity of the predecessors’ opinions, the second input is the validity of one’s own thoughts, and the third – is whether said thoughts are autonomous or implanted by someone else and the existence of an immaterial “thinking thing”. Descartes is commonly criticized for being nihilistic and paranoid, to the point of trapping himself with his own beliefs. This viewpoint, however, is not entirely true, as they trigger the revaluation of various opinions and research on specific gaps.
Writings like Descartes’ Meditations are a valid way of reminding humanity that everything is not that simple. Present day people have been seeking oversimplification of complicated questions while being too confident about their beliefs and the views offered to them. Thus, it is obvious why modern society is eventually facing the re-emergence of skepticism and said position being used as a means to face flaws in perception and thought processes.