Modern western philosophy begins with Descartes. Do you afford to miss the opening ceremony?
Descartes has been called the father of modern philosophy. And it is not without sufficient reason.
A little background is necessary to realise the enormity of what he did – the “method” he introduced.
In Discourses, fully titled ‘Discourse on the Method of Rightly Conducting One’s Reason and of Seeking Truth in the Sciences”, Descartes discusses what pushed him towards his quest for a new way of thinking. Aristotelianism had been followed for nearly two millennia, with the result that each successive generation was learning its ideas without applying any critical thinking in the process. Attempts to question some of the assumptions or arguments put forward by Aristotle were not just discouraged but even throttled. In his formative years, Descartes could somewhere sense this rigidity of thought in the contemporary establishment, and, in his early 20s, he decided to do something about it. However, on closer inspection, he realized he was not yet ready for such an enormous task and so gave himself a few years’ time in which he travelled far and wide, interacted with people of different cultures and different classes in society, all the while observing their customs and ways of thinking.
“Discourse on Method…” is his exposition of the technique he developed and the circumstances and reasons which led him to it, while “Meditations..” is his attempt at applying that method in order to find certain and indubitable knowledge.
Among the many strands in his method, the common thread is of “Method of Doubt” – to doubt absolutely everything in which he is unable to claim certain knowledge, and then proceed with whatever he has left. In fact, he decided to consider statements even slightly doubtful to be on the same footing as statements that were manifestly false. This is a remarkable approach for someone living in the early 1600s.
Descartes starts by doubting everything his senses present to him, for senses often deceive us – the sun and a street lamp both look the same size when in fact they aren’t. This means he doubts he has a body; he doubts that material things exist; he doubts God for there is no proof of his existence (this consideration proves how serious Descartes was in his quest, for religion occupied a very important part in society in the early 17th century – we all know what happened to Galileo); he even doubts mathematical truths for there is always a possibility that a devil is so deceiving him that he is able to feed this belief in his mind that mathematical statements like 2+2=4 are objectively true, when in fact they might not be.
However, even after he doubts everything, he notices that he cannot doubt the fact that he is doubting. That he is a thinking being. Thus emerged Cogito ergo sum, or “I think therefore I am”. This statement is arguably the most popular phrase ever written or said by any philosopher.
In Meditations, Descartes introduces a number of ideas – some original and some rephrased versions of those that had previously existed. For example, the Ontological proof for the existence of God had existed for a long time, and Descartes gave his own version – God is an entity greater than whom nothing can be conceived; existence is a positive trait; therefore, God without existence is inferior to God with existence, therefore the concept of God necessitates his existence.
His work also saw the emergence of two new revolutionary ideas.
The first one was Rationalism, the view that knowledge can be derived from pure reasoning and logic, without any inputs from the external physical world. Descartes never uses this term, but his methodology serves as a perfect example of this technique.
The second one was Dualism, the view that there are two types of substances – mind and matter. Humans, for example, had a thinking non-material mind and a non-thinking material body.
The rise of Empiricism in the British Isles, and Kant’s subsequent struggle to balance the two views has set the course of philosophy ever since.
The first time I had heard about his proofs for the existence of God, I had wondered how he had been called a rationalist. But what Descartes is trying to say is that a God is necessary for us to have any knowledge at all – the concept of a benevolent God ensures that I am justified in accepting the general beliefs that make life possible, for he is presenting those ideas to me and, being benevolent, he cannot be a deceiver. If I reject his existence, I cannot possibly know anything at all, as I may be being deceived at every instant of my life.
Descartes often uses long sentences, and it is a treat for the involved reader as he tries to make sense of them. Often, I would have to re-read entire paragraphs just to understand what he was saying, because they would amalgamate various issues related to the central message. If not anything else, the book would surely serve as an example of how to coherently present a set of ideas which have many strands at each level.
The importance of this work in the history of philosophy cannot be overemphasised. The two works combined barely reach a hundred and fifty pages, and it is indispensable reading for anyone even slightly interested in the history of development of human thought.